LOS ANGELES — Mitt Romney was dealt a new distraction when a video surfaced Monday that shows him dismissing President Barack Obama’s supporters as people who take no responsibility for their livelihoods and who think they are entitled to government handouts.
In the video, published by Mother Jones magazine, the Republican presidential nominee tells a private audience of campaign donors that the backers will vote for Obama “no matter what” and that he does not “worry about those people.”
“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,” Romney said.”These are people who pay no income tax.”
He added that his job “is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”
The author of the Mother Jones article said the fundraiser took place on May 17th, in Boca Raton, Fla., at a the home of Marc Leder, a private equity manager.
In the video, Romney uses language that is far more blunt than it is in his public appearances. His remarks could undermine recent attempts by his campaign to present him as a caring and charitable leader in his church and community.
Speaking to reporters last night in Costa Mesa, Calif., where he was attending a fundraiser, Romney stood by his comments, saying he was talking about campaign strategy, not his vision for the country.
“It’s not elegantly stated. . . . I’m speaking off the cuff in response to a question,” he said. “We have a very different approach, the president and I, between a government-dominated society and a society driven by free people pursuing their dreams,” he added.
Asked what he meant by the words “victims” and “personal responsibility,” Romney said that he was “talking about the political process of drawing people into my own campaign.”
“Of course individuals are going to take responsibility for their lives,” he said. “My campaign is about helping people take more responsibility and becoming employed again, particularly those who don’t have work. This whole campaign is based on getting people jobs again, putting people back to work,” he said.
“This is ultimately a question about direction for the country. Do you believe in a government-centered society that provides more and more benefits or do you believe instead in a free-enterprise society where people are able to pursue their dreams?”
The Obama campaign quickly seized on the video.
“It’s shocking that a candidate for president of the United States would go behind closed doors and declare to a group of wealthy donors that half the American people view themselves as ‘victims,’ entitled to handouts, and are unwilling to take ‘personal responsibility’ for their lives. It’s hard to serve as president for all Americans when you’ve disdainfully written off half the nation,” Obama campaign manager Jim Messina said in a statement.
An Obama campaign official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said later that it is possible that excerpts from the video will show up in a forthcoming campaign ad.
In the video, Romney said that he does not vilify the president because his own campaign’s discussions with focus groups of independent voters who supported Obama in 2008 suggest that tough talk does not work.
“When you say to them, ‘Do you think Barack Obama is a failure?’ they overwhelmingly say, ‘No,’ ” Romney said. “They love the phrase that he’s ‘over his head.’ . . . We spend our days with people who agree with us. And these people are people who voted for him and don’t agree with us. And so the things that animate us are not the things that animate them.”
Candidates tend to talk more freely at closed-door fundraisers than they do publicly, and when those remarks leak out, they can create controversy. In 2008, Obama told supporters at a San Francisco fundraiser that small-town Pennsylvania voters “get bitter, they cling to guns or religion” — a quote that was used against him Monday by Romney’s running mate, Paul Ryan, during a campaign event in Des Moines.
The mention of Obama’s 2008 remarks — and Ryan’s “This Catholic deer hunter is guilty as charged” rejoinder — has been a staple of the GOP vice-presidential nominee’s stump speech.
In the video, Romney also noted his deficit in the polls among Hispanic voters and joked about his family background. His father, George, was born in Mexico while his American grandparents lived there. “Had he been born of Mexican parents, I’d have a better shot of winning this.”
He added: “I say that jokingly, but it would be helpful to be Latino.”
The video, released in bits and pieces, appears to have been captured by a hidden camera during a question-and-answer session that was closed to reporters. Ten separate portions of the video, including Romney’s remarks about Obama supporters, were first posted on YouTube on Aug. 27 by a user identified as “Anne Onymous,” who is listed as having joined the video service that day. The user’s account includes a picture of a young woman, and lists their location as “China.”
Earlier Monday, Mother Jones said on its Web site that it blurred some parts of the video and was withholding the date and location of the event to protect a “confidential source” who provided it. The magazine said the fundraiser occurred after Romney had all but secured the nomination in mid-April.
Dan Eggen and Rachel Weiner in Washington and Felicia Sonmez in Des Moines, Iowa, contributed to this report.
Romney is just speaking the truth.. what is wrong with that? If you ask Obama voters why they are voting for him in 2008 and 2012.. it s the same. He will give me stuff. I have plenty of friends who say because he is nice and Romney is not. I say to that, get informed or don’t vote! It is just plain ignorant
What you wrote is a joke, right?
I know plenty of Obama supporters who support him because they too want a house, free health care, food, a car – etc without the hard work attached to acquiring the American dream. Obama is great for people who have no work ethic attached to their character. He is a dream – a visionary for people who have union jobs.
How many of this type of Obama supporters do you know? 10, 20? They all lack ambition and only want to live off the government? What is their age range?
Plenty. As in all those people I went to college with who took out big loans to get a useless liberal arts degree because, hey atleast its college pass the beer, and then work at a ski mountain part-time and complain about how they don’t have insurance and yatta yatta yatta. Now they want Obama to get them better jobs and pay for their insurance. Meanwhile those of us with real trade skills and the same debt work not fun jobs to pay our own way while these idiots rail for free crap from obama. Now they talk about bailing people out of loan debt? When are these people going to stand up and fund insurance for their slacking neighbors….never if the democrats have their way.
more bs from the right– free crap? — kinda like the tax advantages the wealthy get—
Between 1979 and 2007, the top 1 percent of Americans with the highest incomes have seen their incomes grow by an average of 275 percent, according to the CBO study
To put the growing disparity of income distribution in a slightly different perspective: Between 2005 and 2007, the top one-fifth of earners in America earned more money than the bottom fourth-fifths.–
Income and wealth disparities become even more absurd if we look at the top 0.1% of the nation’s earners– rather than the more common 1%. The top 0.1%– about 315,000 individuals out of 315 million– are making about half of all capital gains on the sale of shares or property after 1 year; and these capital gains make up 60% of the income made by the Forbes 400.—
No wonder the super wealthy plutocrats obtained the largest share of national income– 25% of the nation’s wealth- greater than any other industrial nation in the the period of 1979 to 2005. Make no mistake; after unemployment– this disparity between the 1%– 3 million– or the 0.1%– the 300,000– and the other 312 million citizens of the U.S. has become the major theme of the Occupy Wall Street movement– and an important national debate.–from Forbes
From 2000 to 2007, household income was virtually stagnant, said economist Heidi Shierholz with the Economic Policy Institute
My question was for Jonathan Smith. (Now I see the Lost in Space reference.)
Ski mountain resorts? If you had half the brain you think you do you would have chosen a trade skill you actually enjoy doing instead of choosing a career that made you so bitter..I paid every dime of my loans back, picked a trade I enjoyed, bought a house, raised three daughters as a single mom and supported them completely….just because your choices were bad ones doesn`t mean Obama supporters made the mistakes you did…I had fun earning my way….you should have made better choices.
you ROCK!
Congratulations to you!
Sounds like you don’t “know” any of those people at all – you’re just making up reasons why they MIGHT vote how you think they MIGHT and which MIGHT support your vitriol.
Divided we fall, my friend.
Plenty? Are we talking about Ms. Plenty O’Generalities? I dated her in High School, we broke up because she wasn’t very reliable and converted to antectodalitis, this grand new (for the time) religion.
How is she doing anyway?
This small business owner is voting for Obama. I also went to a liberal arts school.
You speak the truth.
You can start the list with his Auntie Zenutie here in Boston….
You really know “plenty” of Obama supporters? Doubt it.
I owned my house before I ever heard of Senator Obama, am not on S.S, medicare, medicaid, foodstamps or any other government program, stop lying to make yourself feel above others! A union man or woman will come when your house is on fire, a union man or woman will teach your children, a union man or woman will come to your aid when the rich mans drug addict son breaks into your home, they are the American dream, teachers, fireman, cops,,,heros everyone of them and entitled to every benefit a vet gets.
////
No you don’t; that’s a lie. You DON’T know anyone like that. Who have you had a conversation with that has said “I’m voting for Obama because he’s going to give me free stuff? NOBODY.
Who have I had a conversation with that has said “I’m voting for “X” because they’re gonig to lower my taxes? Several people. Its the same thing but on different sides. Grow up.
I own my own business and am starting a second one. I will be voting for Obama.
I pay taxes, I don’t receive assistance, no grants, no loans, no special loop holes for me.
“union jobs”. you mean like teachers, firemen, policemen, nurses?
Scum of the earth, that ilk. America would be better off without those people!!!
(sarcasm off)
In my community there are more registered republicans than democrats. There are seven churches in a two mile radius so it’s a rather conservative community. A large number of people use welfare in order to survive, especially in the winter. A large number of those people are registered, church going republicans. People from both political parties rely on welfare in order to survive.
Many Obama supporters are highly educated, successful, hard working Americans. The repubs are always complaining about us being over educated and heckling us because we have chosen to become educated. All of the statistics say that those with more education are supporting the president in higher numbers.
Read my comment above and get a clue because you obviously are as out of touch as the MittTwit you support for president.
How about vets who collect well-earned benefits? They are part of the 47%, but they are not free loaders! That’s just one example. Romney showed that he has no understanding of the country. None.
I am a vet. I have certain EARNED entitlements. You are grasping at straws and are completely disconnected from reality.
Sir. That is exactly what I said – Vets earned their benetifs and are NOT freeloaders.
And Romney never suggested they were. His issue is with undeserved/unearned entitlements. You are the one that dragged veterans into this.
Yes. He did. Vets are among the 47%. So are retired working people who worked hard all their lives and now collect social security. Mitt was wrong and is wrong for the USA.
So working hard brings entitlement? If you spent you whole life making big rocks into little rocks with a hammer, your pile of rocks would be worth… whatever the going rate on a pile of rocks is. It does not entitle you to health care, a house, a car or anything else. You might want to look up “Marxism” because that is exactly what you want.
Throughout history, civilizations have respected and taken care of their elders, who worked hard and provide wisdom. Your view is to simply to throw old people out to fend for themselves. Romney said something very similar to your heartless approach, but he immediately backpedaled and whimpered that he spoke in haste.
Explain how you made the connection from Marxism to euthanasia. Don’t worry; I’ll wait.
Bullpuckey. In many societies when the old were no longer capable of taking care of themselves they were sent off to die or were expected to do so themselves. Many native American cultures did this in fact.
And should we even mention the fact that generally only the fit and strong survived to old age in times past.
Many Native American cultures didn’t. Many cultures took care of their elders. But you want America to be a culture that just cuts them right off even after a long life of hard work, right?
What about Christian cultures, do they just throw their elders out when they aren’t useful anymore?
Where’s your conscience?
Romney is somewhat progressive.
The progressive socialist are trying to manipulate the elders, by telling them that Romney is going to cut them off.
Its a tall tale.
Republicans are not going to cut seniors off.
They are going to try to preserve the system, and start us in repair the way Obama should have done (and if they don’t try they won’t get elected again).
Its like the healthcare.
Obama / crew made point upon point how they modeled Obamacare after Romneycare, and it was an original republican idea…and then when Romney says he is going to have some form of healthcare reform (more in line with Romneycare )…everyone is shocked?
Are you aware that the Obama health care reforms are based on the Massachusetts health care system Romney put in place, almost 100%?
Yes and no..not 100 percent though (it was ACCORN or some other now defunct group which put it together).
I think the biggest deal and why it is really not the same was the states rights issue (10th amendment).
It backfired on the democrats.
Romney is somewhat progressive and will institute some form of healthcare reform.
You should read this link:
http://www.redstate.com/rjsantorum/2012/03/26/romneycare-inspires-obamacare-but-not-america/
…to an article by none other than *Rick Santorum* on a major conservative blog on the differences between Romneycare and Obamacare.
Thanks…….I will check it out.
Good article.
I don’t think Santorum has read the entire bill; 2074 pages long vs. 70 pages for Romneycare.
There are major differences.
I don’t trust the government to save me money:).
Like I said….Romney is somewhat (if there is such a thing) progressive.
I believe we will have some form of healthcare reform based upon the MA plan.
Yes Romney will go back to there are insurance companies selling insurance, buy it. Now you people who can’t afford it even though you are working, but not paying income tax because you little peons don’t make enough money, sorry but may I suggest die quickly then your family may get to keep your measly estate.
OOOH, the ACORN threat….. nice try but get your facts from somewhere othere than Faux News.
Obamacare was set up by the same guy who set up Romneycare in Mass., with over 160 senate and house republican amendments added to the final bill.
Obamcare is now the law of the land. It will be fine tuned as time passes.
Romney can’t be trusted. He has turned his back on Romneycare, saying he won’t seek it for America, and he has said he will repeal Obamacare entirely, and he has flip-flopped on global warming, abortion, and other social issues, and he has just said that 47% of Americans are basically bad people, leeches, and then he immediately turned around when caught and said he didn’t mean it. And so on.
No Romney did not say that.
Most Americans believe in some form of healthcare reform….just not the way Obama and family shoved it down Americans throats.
Romney has not flip flopped on this.
Its hard to worry about the sky is falling when your up to your butt in aligators (global warming / rich hippie view).
Story….there was an eagle egg which fell from the nest and landed in the chicken pen.
A mother hen sat on the egg and hatched it out.
Everyday the young eagle looked into the sky at the other eagles flying and dreamed of being like them.
The other hens looked at the eagle and said;
“quit your dreaming….you are not an eagle..your just a stupid chicken”.
That is what the progressives have done to many of the 47%…they have made them to believe they are not eagles, they are just stupid chickens….and then they blame eagles for being eagles.
Here is a direct quote from Romney, talking about the 47%:
“[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”
http://pollways.bangordailynews.com/2012/09/17/national/leaked-romney-tape-shows-mitts-misunderstandings/
No matter how you try to wiggle and spin–like he does–he said something despicable, and riled up irrational hate in the hardcore right wing.
I believe he is speaking the truth…they think they are stupid chickens that the progressives have conditioned them to believe (part of the ignorant masses)…. not eagles.
Romney is not going to be able to change their minds, so he can’t worry about their vote.
Dems in Maine have been raising chickens for years with their unfunded entitlements .
Romney said on Meet the Press last Sun. he liked some things in Obamacare and would keep them but Monday his campaign said no that he was going to repeal Obamacare completely. Not to worry just another flip flop, does anyone know where he really stands?
Rick Santorum (sp) said this weekend at the Values Voter Summit that the Republicans would never have the elite or smart ones, referring to people in the party, and I for one agree with him 100%. I don’t think you should refer to them as stupid chickens
your analogy is for the birds.
no, really.
He said nothing like what you are spinning.Romney simply said that those who enjoy entitlements will not vote for him.AKA most dems,Nice Pelosi spin though.
A large percentage of the 47% who don’t pay taxes are the Republican base, poor southern whites that are poorly educated and therefore easily led. They will be believing that somehow Romney was not talking about them when he says “people who don’t py taxes”.
We need to remember that the 47% refers to income tax only. 100% of people pay sales tax, excise tax, highway tolls, possibly property tax. So the GOP idea that 47% of Americans aren’t contributing is incorrect.
Most people who receive entitlements are retired. Older people tend to vote conservatively.
I think you’re confused. Like Romney.
you have to stop posting this foolishness ……….. folks are beginning to notice how far around the bend you have gone
Maybe he is simply a troll out for his kicks….
Most took care of their elders. Romney and his gang simply want to throw those they view as ‘unfit’ into the streets to fend for themselves.
Yeah, nice people they are who feel that way.
Totally wrong. I can think of no society that wants to throw their elderly away.
Most ancient societies revered their elder citizens because they were a great source of knowledge (there are neaderthal remains of obviously elderly or crippled members of society that were taken care of by the tribe) and the reason less peope lived to old age was not a result of the society throwing their old people out but the fact that life was tough and that getting to old age was tough.
The only society I know of that wants to throw the elderly out to their own means is the currently Republican Party becaude of greed.
Please provide one academic reference for your assumption about native cultures and their treatment of the elderly.
OH? you saw it on TV and can’t provide a foot note and three references?
pfffft.
I think I first heard of this in a World Ethnology class 10 years ago. I’m not writing a research paper, so I’m really not interested in “wikipedia is not an academic source”. If the references to support the wiki are valid, then that’s good enough for me… for here.
“Senilicide and Invalidicide among the Eskimos” by Rolf Kjellstrom in Folk: Dansk etnografisk tidsskrift, volume 16/17 (1974/75)
First Nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples : exploring their past, present, and future. Books.google.ca. 2006. ISBN 978-1-55239-167-9. Retrieved 2011-01-24.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senicide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit
http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/04/opinion/etzioni-elderly/index.html
I would love to see where you read this. Please give us the resource.
come on .. you can’t be that clueless… no body.. and I mean nobody wants to throw old people out to fend for themselves not Romney and Not Obama and not any one posting here.. get out of the dump .. say something worthy or a response .. add something to the debate.. your skirt is showing too..
Not true at all. Individuals took care of their elders. Now we ship them off to homes so that they don’t get in the way of our good time and we make others pay for that.
A Paul supporter, I see.
Right on.
Now, let’s work on developing some heart. There’s nothing wrong with looking out for our fellow Americans.
You’ve got a better chance of hitting Powerball without buying a ticket than you do of seeing the TP slime developing a heart.They all got theirs so screw anyone else coming down the road.
Because I disagree with what you so vehemently support, I’m a Tea Party supporter? Be more extreme please. It’s working so well for Islam.
You sir are a (fill in appropriate expletive here)!!
If I worked my entire life making smaller rocks then I have benefited society by supplying smaller rocks for those who need them. If I showed up to work everyday and did my job well I should have been paid a living wage, from which I should have been able to provide myself and my family with a house, food and if thrifty a car. If I paid into my SS and Medicare INSURANCE then you’re damn tootin’ I deserve those benefits when it comes time to collect them!
How dare you think that because someone has a menial job that they don’t count? If it were not for the people who do the hard and dirty jobs those who aspire to a higher calling would not have the opportunity to do so. The laborer makes your life possible.
BTW, those people that Romney (et al) continue to insist pay no taxes pay plenty of taxes. They may not owe income tax because their income is too low to qualify, but they pay sales tax, property tax, tax on their car, etc. EVERYONE in this country pays taxes, and plenty of them.
You and the others who will continue to defend the far right Oligarchy should be forced to walk a mile in the common man’s shoes before you are allowed to vote. Or breath.
The family business growing up was fire sprinklers; I’ve hung plenty of pipe. I’ve also dug plenty of ditches for $10/h. After that, I worked in a kitchen for two years before spending nine in the military.
But your post is not entirely invalid.
Everyone deserves a living wage if they CONTRIBUTE TO SOCIETY. Also IF a person pays into Medicare and Social Security, they should receive the benefit. What about those who do not pay into it and still reap the rewards of others labor?
Why are you so blind with rage?
Many are filled with rage. Thanks to Gingrich and his Contract With America the political parties have diverged to the point of being extremist in views. There are no longer any moderates in America. You are either with us or against us! So don’t accuse Kathy S of being enraged without first acknowledging the reason why. I believe the upcoming election is indeed a mandate on the future of America. Depending upon which party wins control of our country we will either finish the process of becoming an economic feudal state or we’ll become a country where everyone has a chance to live and flourish.
I worked for 55 years and paid into SS and Medicare I am entitled to SS payment and health care. I don’t make enough money to pay federal income taxes so Mr. Romney has basically said I am the scum of the US because I receive money from the government and pay no taxes.
Romney was just saying what he really feels and if anyone,who for no fault of their own must accept some type of welfare thinks Romney is going to help them, then forget it, he is going to take care of the rich only.
I have a hard time believing he was including the elderly, those who have previous contributed to the combined effort, along with the able bodied parasites who draw from gov programs simply because they can do so without contribution.
Despite what words people are putting in my mouth, I actually favor increased benefits to the retired/elderly.
Maybe he didn’t mean us but we were included in the 47%, you see this is what happens when one engages their mouth before they engage their brain. Mr. (R)money has a habit of doing that and that is one of the reasons for NOT voting for him, another is that he has shown that he really doesn’t care about the poor or middle class.
Imagine that dolt Romney dealing with a foreign security emergency! “Oh, I spoke in haste but hey, right or wrong America never apologizes or makes good on their mistakes.”
If a retirement fund is what your employer offered you in exchange for your labor, that’s not marxism, that’s capitalism.
If you want to promise benefits in lieu of wages and then kick the can down the road and blame the workers, that’s modern conservatism.
If Bill Buckley were alive, he’d die all over again reading the unmitigated falsehoods on this comment section.
Elderly retired social security recipients EARNED their benefits just as much as you.
When did I say they didn’t?
You implied that working hard (breaking rocks) didn’t entitle people to benefits. I took that to mean the general working population. If that’s not what you meant, I apologize. My point was that not only vets. had earned their benefits, others had as well. Anyway, I stand by my belief that you and I are both included in Romneys 47%. His and Ryans goal is to slowly dismantle social security and medicare.
nope .. I’m a Viet Nam survivor.. I am also 66 years old.. Romney does not include me in the 47% and you people know it..
God bless you and thank you for your service.
PS. you need to read the article in the American Enterprise Institute upon which Romney based his statement. The author of the article includes all entitlements and pensions in the 47% number. So that means, you and all other retired federal employees.
As though the AEI could be trusted to put out any facts without spinning the numbers for their benefit.
I read the root material in order to get past the rhetoric. Now, we can debate the subject and point out it’s lack of merit.
Romney certainly does include you–and also my husband, another Vietnam survivor–in the 47% of Americans he reviles. Unless, of course, you’re extremely wealthy. As for my husband, he’s collecting Social Security (which the Republicans hope to destroy in the name of saving it) and signed up for Medicare (for which they have a similar plan).
Yes he does include you and all other veterans and retirees.
You’re included. To him and his elite pals, you’re a worthless nobody that served his purpose, and should now be discarded. I have to say that I was a proud Republican for many years, but the party has greatly changed it’s ideology. They have, as a party, sold out to the rich and large corporations. I’m still a registered republican, but not so proud of it anymore.
Actually, that’s exactly what he said. He did not differentiate between veterans, seniors who have paid into the system all their lives, and frauds gaming the system. He put anyone who gets a government check all in one basket and said he didn’t care.
Mr. Schell, Romney doesn’t care about you. Watch the video and read the transcripts.
Do you understand the term “Income Tax”?
Your benefits for your service are not in the same category. They simply aren’t.
actually, you need to read the article in the American Enterprise Institute that talks about this number (47%). The author, Nicholas Eberstadt, lumps all entitlement programs and pensions in to that number. Ergo, he is not only counting vets, but retired federal workers as well.
I saw that a bit ago. Thanks.
He isn’t “for” you.
Exactly. This President & his administration were
caught sleeping on 9.11 of all days.
Four dead Americans in a pre-planned consulate attack that they had
knowledge was coming.
Regarding “vets,” even more enlightening is the fact that four
more active duty personnel were killed over the weekend & over $200MM in
damage caused. What’s the Prez doing,
including the very night of 9.11 & this past weekend? FUNDRAISING.
This guy is so out of touch & incompetent that it is inconceivable
that anyone w/any intelligence or personal integrity could even think about voting
for him. I doubt that many people w/DD214s will be…
I gave you too much credit for intellectual capability in the other post. Good grief!
Ha! You confuse me
w/someone who gives a flying… whatever about any “credit” you might
bestow w/regard to “intellect,” although aside from your attempt to divert, I
notice that you can’t refute what I wrote.
Feel free to discuss 9/11/01 when 3000 died and another 4000 died needlessly in the decade since.Which President was sleeping then-that’s right,the one who was totally responsible for it,that’s who.Please put the blame where it belongs and stop lying.
Over 70% of all military deaths in Afghanistan
have occurred under President Obama. You can bring all the blind passion you
want to the table, but it is empty, meaningless, hypocritical drivel when you
refuse to acknowledge that this president was in Vegas rubbing elbows &
telling jokes @ a fundraiser a mere few hours after four members of the
diplomatic corp were murdered. Same thing on the weekend after losing four more
members of the U.S.
Military. W/regard to “lying,” stop lying to yourself.
Bush/Cheney/Rove started that war plain and simple. Obama is trying to repair their screwup. Stop being revisionist. Ditto for ruining an economy that Clinton actually had in the green! And no, I haven’t confused you with anyone at all. The GOP depends upon ignorance to survive and it appears they’ve found their mark.
The deaths under Obama’s watch are someone else’s
fault? Yeah, No prob, just for kicks,
how many D’s were all gung ho to go into Iraq @ the time? (For that matter,
I didn’t agree w/it then, I dislike it now, of course someone w/a DD214
understands that & people like you make me ill.) Once again, you fail to refute any facts
& simply rely on your parroting of the L talking points. W/regard to confusion, revisionism &
ignorance, you are entirely all too comfortable
w/that & an obvious expert on those traits. Congrats.
There is no evidence it was a preplanned attack on the consulate.
Besides it is the host country’s responsibility to provide security for embassy’s and consulate’s in their country. Or do you believe that Russia, for example, has armed soldiers prepared to kill Americans if for some reason Americans decide to attack a Russian embassy?
should have have sent arms to another country? that would have been in opposition to international law.
No, they are not a part of the 47%. The 47% number only takes into account “taxpayers” – those who work. The 47% number does not take into account the 2/3 of the US population who do not work. You showed that you have no understanding of the issue, but Romney does understand.
Please read the article. Mitt stated that the 47% are dependent on govt and that % includes Vets, who earned their benefits and others are have always been hard-working Americans.
Support Mitt, but understand that he has no understanding of how hard-working Americans live.
This is the same Mitt who tells kids to borrow money from their parents to start a business and he does not mean a few bucks to buy a truck or some tools. He’s talking millions. He gave his kid $10M. He is just out-of-touch.
Please show me where Romney included Vets…. direct quote please. Otherwise you are simply fibbing.
Romney doesn’t care about vets. He didn’t even mention the war in his RNC acceptance speech. Also, it is obvious that many vets are committed to voting for Obama, so that puts them in the 47%.
As usual, your logic is horrible. And your claim that the poster is lying is ridiculous.
It’s simple really. Mitt said that 47% of people do not pay income tax. If a vet does not pay income tax and instead lives off the benefits from service, then they are included in that 47%. To put it in even simpler terms. IF not paying income tax THEN included in the 47%. Did he specifically make a statement about vets? No. But using a little thing called “logic” you would see that vets would be included in his statistic if they do not pay income tax.
Then you just entered the fibbing category.
For using “logic” and “reasoning”?
No for attributing something to a person they did not say by reason of your own personal logic.
Ok, I’m going to go really slow for you. Are there vets who do NOT pay income tax?
I’ll go even slower for you…….. If you cannot site an example then you are fibbing. Simple really…. your false logic shows nothing except your false logic.
You didn’t answer my question. Are there vets who do NOT pay income tax?
No point. Once you decided to go slow… I was out.
I think you mean no point because you don’t want to admit you are wrong…
You set up a straw man argument and want to make a point with it. Go ahead. You still can’t produce a statement to back it up. I’m a vet by the way.
And if you do not pay income tax, then you are included in that 47% that Romney thinks is depending on the government.
You won’t get any satisfaction from this poster. Their goal is to frustrate, by twisting and distorting your words. Thank you for your patience and your intelligent points.
“IF not paying income tax THEN included in the 47%” – What part of that logic is incorrect?
Cheesey it would seem that when any politician makes a statement saying that he doesn’t care about almost half the Citizens of the Country or a statement that could be taken for that less then two months before a what has been called a close Presidential election that he has to have a screw loose. It makes no difference what party they are in.
It is also a reflection of reality and the times we live in though. We are at an inflection point. Do we intentionally become a larger entitled dependent culture or do we give ourselves the tools to crawl out of it. It may well be too late.
One of the problems that we face, and it is a very large one, is that the baby boomers are now becoming eligible for both Medicare and Social Security. A large number of them will not receive enough in SS benefits to have to pay income tax. For most it is not a fault of not having worked, it is the fact that they worked all their lives at low paying jobs. I remember a conversation I had one day with the owner of one of Bangor’s family run restaurants, Pilot’s Grill. During that conversation one of the kitchen workers came up and asked him a question. The man had worked at the restaurant for over 30 years and was working either at or slightly above minimum wage. The owner of the restaurant made the statement during the conversation that “we need these people” and he was correct. Without people who wash dishes, bus tables or do any of the number of low wage jobs we would all be in trouble. Just because someone does not make an income large enough to make them pay income taxes does not mean that they have not been productive members of society. It doesn’t make them leeches. We have working poor in this country and while it is easy to damn anyone who doesn’t pay income taxes as lazy that in a lot of cases just isn’t true. As I said before any politician who makes a statement like the one Romney made especially in this day of Iphones and such has to have a screw loose.
Your story about the fellow who worked clearing tables is a valid one, but I think we may be talking past each other here. We are in real trouble if folks like you can’t see the danger in becoming a dependent society. Sooner or later our people will come into conflict with one another. That divide is accelerating. The very fact that a Presidential candidate gave voice to the obvious should have given you pause. The fact he said it in room full of powerful like minded people should concern you more.
First off I should make the point that I am not a fan of Barack Obama. I have stated on numerous occasions that I felt he was a great campaigner and a terrible leader. In fact I had hoped that the Republicans would have put up a candidate that would have been better then what they did. John Huntsman comes to mind, but he could not pass muster with the radical right wing of the tea party so now the Republicans are stuck with Mitt. I have actually met Romney a couple of times and he seems to be a decent guy, but he has flip flopped so many times that he gives the impression of not really standing for anything other then making money which he was very good at. He comes across as someone who is trying to be all things to all people and that is what has gotten him into trouble. As I said earlier for any candidate to make the statement he made in a room full of people, even extremely wealthy ones, is in my opinion nuts in this day of instant communication. Here in the State of Maine we have seen over the years the radical right wing of the Republican Party put up candidates who marched in lockstep to their ideology and with the exception of the 2010 election they were defeated in the general election. In order for a candidate to win an election they first have to be electable. If they are too extreme either to the right or left then the American people will not give them their vote. Mitt is seen by a good many members of the electorate as wealthy and out of touch with the common voter. Making statements like he has made lately certainly isn’t going to help change those peoples’ minds.
Perhaps, But his comments did touch a cord at work today. One fellow who generally stays out of the political fray rose his head from his work to say. “Whats the big deal. Its true isn’t it?”
You do realize that approximately 28% of these non payers are people who work and have enough deductions to not pay income taxes but do pay payroll taxes.. 10% of the non payers are us older people who are collecting SS or pensions. There is also a small percentage of millionaires who pay no Fed. Income taxes, something under 1%. 7% are people who earn under $20,000 and pay no income taxes. 1% are others.
Mitt really should engage his brain BEFORE engaging his mouth, that is assuming he has a brain, I for one are beginning to question his retention of a brain.
You do realize we are talking about income tax only. Poor people pay sales tax, highway tolls, excise tax, property tax…..
I would have voted for Huntsman. But he came out in in the primaries and said “I believe in science”.
Apparently, statements like that don’t appeal to the Republican base.
A shame that was. Not his statement but that Republicans are such Christian extremists.
Oh hello!!!! thank you for your post!!! Listen, I’m a dem, no apologies. But the GOP acting like a they don’t believe in science just lets my party get away with extremism too.
It’s horrible! How do we get rational people back in the fold?
Troller……..
Wofie, That you?
It doesn’t matter. Conservatives like you will never argue a fact. You’re the type of people that could look at a white wall and truthfully believe it’s black.
Veterans are disproportionately homeless.
Nearly one in seven homeless adults are veterans, as of December 2011.More than 67,000 homeless veterans were counted on a given January night in America last year. More than 4 in 10 homeless veterans were found unsheltered.Almost half of homeless veterans were African American in 2008 despite the fact that only 11 percent of veterans overall are African American.1.5 million veterans are at risk of homelessness due to poverty, lack of support networks, and dismal living conditions in overcrowded or substandard housing.
Many veterans have trouble finding good jobs–30.2 percent of veterans ages 18 to 24 were unemployed according to unpublished 2011 Bureau of Labor Statistics data.
Nearly 1 in 10 veterans with disabilities were not employed in 2010.According to Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, a 2007 survey showed that more than one-third of employers were unaware of protections they must provide to service members, and more than half spent less than 2 percent of their recruitment budget on military advertising and/or did not understand the qualifications of military service.In that same survey more than half of all veterans were unsure of how to professionally network, and nearly three in four felt unprepared to negotiate salary and benefits and/or unable to effectively translate military skills.More than 968,000 of veterans ages 18 to 64 had been in poverty in the past year in 2010.
[http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/military/news/2012/03/06/11201/veteran-poverty-by-the-numbers/]
The safety net provides veterans with critical food, heat, and health assistance.
More than 33,000 veterans were housed since 2009 by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Veterans Affairs in permanent, supportive housing with case managers and access to VA health care.Through its Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program, the Veterans Administration provided a wide range of career services, including counseling and training, to more than 116,000 veterans with service-connected disabilities in fiscal year 2011.$31 million of SNAP/food stamps funding in 2008 was spent at military commissaries to help feed military members and their families who struggle against hunger.
A veteran lives in one in five households benefiting from the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which provides heating and cooling assistance.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/military/news/2012/03/06/11201/veteran-poverty-by-the-numbers/
I know what a “safety net is”. The question is how long are we as a society going to be able sustain it as it continues to grow.
I make regular contribution to Penquis CAP.
I am a veteran.
Are you saying that retired vets are among the top income earners?
No.
Does Romney say anywhere that he is not including vets in the 47%, or the retired who earned their money b efore retiring?
If he did not exclude them then he must be including them because Republican’s in general and Romney in particular are attacking SS.
Here are some statistics for veterans living in poverty and receiving government benefits–they’re part of the 47% of Americans whom Romney lives to despise.
Results for 2011 Survey of LIHEAP Recipients 12.8.2011Congress is considering deep cuts in LIHEAP for FY 2012… The impact of cuts will be severe and hurt some of the most vulnerable households in the US.
NEADA recently completed a survey of families receiving LIHEAP in FY 2011. One of the most surprising facts was the rapid increase in the number of households with at least one member who has served in the military.
The percent of LIHEAP recipients with at least one veteran increased from 12% of allhouseholds in FY 2008 served to 20% in FY 2011. In other words, the number of LIHEAP recipient households with a veteran has increased by almost 1.1 million households from about 700,000 to 1.78 million. What do these families look like?
Of the military families,
7% are currently serving in the military and 93% are veterans.
Of the veterans, 64% have a household member who is 60 or older
• 55% have a household member who is 60 or older and received Social Security, pensions, or otherretirement income
49% of have a disabled household member
25% have a child 18 and under•
12% served in Iraq or Afghanistan
Of the veterans without a senior in the home,12% served in Iraq or Afghanistan•
20% served in Iraq or Afghanistan•
59% had one or more unemployed household members
• 21% are in job training
39% received TANF, SSI, General Assistance, or Public Assistance•
70% received food stamps or lived in public or subsidized housing
http://www.neada.org/communications/press/LIHEAP%20Veteran%20Study%20V3%20doc.pdf
Your comment stretches logic quite a bit…Believe me I’m by no means a Romney fan but to have all these people (you included) truly believe or at least state as you have that Romney would say outright and state clearly that he believes vets do not warrant benefits is ridiculous and simply wastes time. We as united people in this country have to move beyond this petty talk and taking things out of context discussions (including Obama’s “you didn’t build that comment”) which keeps us from moving forward.
Couple things:
1. My point is not that Romney does not care about veterans, but that he inadvertently included them in his 47% statistic. When he says that “These are people who pay no income tax”, he is including veterans who have retired and are not paying income tax, but are still receiving government benefits. The point is to counter the idea that 47% of the country are just “freeloaders” living off of the government, when that is not the case. The veterans example is meant as a counter example to that idea.
2. While it was not ALL benefits, Romney has stated that legally married veterans in same sex relationships should not get spousal benefits.
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRN9Y5Nvdqk
Romney made the blanket statement that 47% of the population pay no taxes and he isn’t going to worry about them.
Where do you think the military is drawing its manpower from?
Romney is 100% accurate. Basically 50% of us are taking care of the other 50%.
http://pollways.bangordailynews.com/2012/09/17/national/leaked-romney-tape-shows-mitts-misunderstandings/
Romney distorted horribly. For instance, many who don’t pay income tax pay a payroll tax instead, and are very hard working.
Besides your claim isn’t what he said at all.
And your claim is wrong because most all of us pay sales tax, and contribute to “taking care” of society that way, just for starters.
During a private reception with wealthy donors this year, Mitt Romney described almost half of Americans as “people who pay no income tax” and are “dependent upon government.” Those voters, he said, would probably support President Obama because they believe they are “victims” who are “entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it.”
Close enough for me.
He also backpedaled from those claims and said he spoke in haste.
Only after he got caught.
Millionaires with off-shore accounts don’t pay taxes either.
Like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz?
Is she running for President?
More like Romney.
Sure they do.
Just not true.
Just because 47%, which is a statistic from 2009 and may be no longer valid, do not pay taxes does not mean that the other 50% is taking care of them. It just means that they do not make enough money, dependant on their income and family status to break the threshold of whether they pay Federal Income Taxes. They still pay other taxes, including Federal Payroll Taxes, State taxes and other fees. Many support themselves without any help form either State or Federal goveenments or any help from charities by working multiple low paying jobs.
If Romney gets his way with the Federal Tax Code then he and other very rich people will become members of the pay no Federal Taxes because they live off of dividends, Capital Gains taxes and Differed Income, all of which Romeny wants to make non taxable.
Who are the real leaches? The mega rich who take most of the Federal Governments services or the poor who use very little of the Federal services if neither pay any taxes?
…….
He was refering to taxpayers….. People who file returns.
No he was referring to those who don’t pay taxes.
”These are people who pay no income tax.”
show us that he wasn’t.
Most disabled vets do not have to pay income tax.
I don’t make a lot of money, I helped both of my sons the best I could. My youngest has has basically worked full time while going for his engineering degree, and my other son is in the US Army repaying his tuition for his dregree.
I never raised my sons to look for the government for anything (they already believe in a creator).
I taught them to work hard for what they want always, and to never make fun of another mans job because if I have not done it I might have too.
I think President Obama is far more out of touch than Mitt Romney.
Let us hope that neither of your children get cancer without first having a healthcare plan to deter the death sentence so many others must face.
I think a guy like Mitt Romney who believes that the avg middle class income is $250,000 is just a little more out of touch than Barack Obama.
Are you absolutely certain that neither of your sons will ever become disabled?
Are you positive that neither will have a child who is born disabled or becomes disabled?
Are you so extremely wealthy that you would be able to support a disabled adult or grandchild for the rest of his or her life? In that case, get rid of SSI, Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, etc, and tax breaks… for YOUR family only.
I sure never thought I’d give birth to a daughter with a genetic deletion syndrome, or that my husband and I would be her guardians (we’re now in our mid to late 60s). We have always worked, and earn healthy incomes, but there is NO way we could have paid for her hospitalizations, treatments, in-home supports, and so on, year after year.
Our lovely and loving disabled daughter is one of that 47% of Americans Romney and the Republicans despise. You and your sons are one terrible accident or birth defect away from joining her in that category.
He did not say that. He was talking about the 47% of taxpayers who do not pay a Federal Income tax. If you want to take something out of context, that is your ignorance showing.
47% of taxpayers who do not pay taxes sounds like an oxymoron to me.
So 47% plus 67% equals less than all Americans because of the hard working 38% that are Republicans?
No wonder Republican’s want to get rid of public education, they need a badly educated following to get elected.
if you actually turned off the media and watched him and learned what he says, you would not read between the lines on this. Hes not talking about vets, Hes talking about the same people i have been complaining about for years. The ones that pop kids out, never done anything for society and we pay more in taxes too. He has an amazing plan to overhaul the VA system. Obama just wants to throw money at a broken system, Romney actually wants to fix it and fund it. I commend your service but please you are a totally separate category from those he is talking about.. You and the elderly that paid into the system.
You assume Romney’s not talking about you or anyone you care about. You’re sure he’ll only harm impoverished unmarried women and their kids.
But he’s talking about ordinary Americans who fall into one or more of these categories–elderly, disabled, ill, unemployed, and/or working for poverty wages. ANY of us, no matter how well we’re doing today, are one job loss, one terrible illness or accident, one new baby or grandbaby with a genetic disorder, or a few years of getting older away from being among The Despised 47%.
The reality is that in your effort to help Romney punish people you despise, you’re trying to cut off your own nose to spite someone else’s face.
A great point, thank you. Many vets are dedicated to voting for Obama and that clearly puts them in the 47% Romney mentioned.
Romney also ignores payroll tax, which many working Americans pay, even though they don’t pay income tax. He also ignores the elderly who worked hard all their lives and are now on Social Security. Another problem is that he ignores other taxes, like sales tax and property tax.
For these and other lies and distortions in his secret speech to a $50,000 a seat audience:
http://pollways.bangordailynews.com/2012/09/17/national/leaked-romney-tape-shows-mitts-misunderstandings/
Sprucy you really don’t understand taxing do you, you lump all these taxes into one pile and try to make it sound like that was what he was referring to. Most retired people don’t pay income tax because they no longer work. Sale /property/State Income tax go to the State coffers not the Federal Government. Payroll taxes go into the Social Security Fund and Medicare Fund for retired/disabled people. He’s talking about the 47% of working people who pay no Federal income tax for whatever reason, but receive some form of Federal assistance.
JimmyH wrote, “He’s talking about the 47% of working people who pay no Federal income tax for whatever reason, but receive some form of Federal assistance.”
Precisely–like Wal-Mart workers, who are paid very low wages and often qualify for Medicaid and food stamps (at taxpayer expense, so we’re all subsidizing Wal-Mart’s obscene profits even if we don’t shop there). Romney despises these workers for not earning enough to pay income tax, and adores the corporations that exploit them.
So you know for fact that all Walmart workers receive food stamps and are on Medicaid and get LIHEAP and section 8 housing . I need the link to that info. It’s their business and they set the wage not you. How about we give Walmart tax breaks to be used to raise the workers pay instead of just increasing their tax rate to the Federal Government. This way employees get the increase and they get off the Federal programs and start paying taxes and then the Federal programs won’t need to increased tax for Walmart.
The links you requested:
Walmart employees on food stamps:
http://www.goodjobsfirst.org/corporate-subsidy-watch/hidden-taxpayer-costs Faced with the unavailability or unaffordability of health coverage on the job, growing numbers of lower-income workers are turning to taxpayer-funded healthcare programs such as Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)… [details state by state are found]
Walmart employees who qualify for Medicaid: http://walmartwatch.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/2/files/pdf/medicaid_factsheet.pdf
Using Wal-Mart’s figures, a “full-time” employee at 34 hours per week, making the Wal-Mart average wage of $10.86 per hour, will earn $19,200.48 per year. The federal government’s definition of povertyfor a family of four in the contiguous United States is $21,200. [2008 Wal-Mart Employee Handbook; 2008 HHS Poverty Guidelines]
Walmart employees and public assistance in multiple forms: http://www.ilsr.org/new-study-finds-walmarts-miserly-wages-cost-taxpayers/ California taxpayers are spending $86 million a year providing healthcare and other public assistance to the state’s 44,000 Wal-Mart employees, according to a new study by UC Berkeley’s Institute for Industrial Relations. The study, “Hidden Cost of Wal-Mart Jobs,” found that the average Wal-Mart worker required $730 in taxpayer-funded healthcare and $1,222 in other forms of assistance, such as food stamps and subsidized housing, to get by. Even compared to other retailers, Wal-Mart imposes an especially large burden on taxpayers. Wal-Mart workers earn 31 percent less than the average for workers at large retail companies (more than 1,000 employees), the study found, and require 39 percent more in public assistance.
Taxpayers are already subsidizing Walmart to an astonishing degree. And your solution is to throw more money at big corporations in the form of special tax breaks? You’re so sweetly trusting–so certain that they’ll use the windfall to raise their average employees’ pay! Hilarious!
Well said LizDavies! Well said.
I wonder why Romney hasn’t given us any stats on how many major American corporations didn’t pay their fair share of income tax?
nope not the vets and you knew that before you wrote that foolish comment .. your liberal skirt is showing
Do you think health care is a right? If so, you are part of the 47% Romney does not think he can reach. Capiche?
??? what does political belief have to do with whether or not one pays taxes??
He’s not referring to people who are retired that paid income taxes over their working years. He’s referring to people who are in the workforce now that pay no taxes ” For what ever reason” but receive benefits from the federal system. Those people will probability not vote for him. The old saying are you one of the people riding in the wagon or are you one of the people who’s help pull the wagon.
Did he tell you that in a dream or do you have a link where we can all read it?
I wonder how many corporations paid little or no income taxes.
Poor people tend not to vote. They are disenfranchised.
I’m an Obama supporter and I own my own business. I will vote.
So, Mitt is ‘out of touch’ with most Americans. That’s is what is wrong with that.
That is not true. Many poor people work (called the working poor and lower middle class) vote and those that do work can be very conservative (this why they work and refuse to take government handouts).
This country has lost substancial portion of our middle class (down from 62% to 30 something % I believe). Many of these are single mothers and irresponsible fathers which entitlements and welfare has expanded the problem (same with SSD and methadone drug users / treatment etc.).
Many of the previous middle class people have gone into working poor or unemployed status. While many more have moved up the (baby boomers) income ladder to higher class.
The 47 Percent Romney is speaking on are those who believe the Government owes them or are dependent on the government to provide and those the progressives have manipulated into believing they will loose what they actually paid into the system.
The democrats have basically spun tales on this.
seems like there is some tale spinning on both sides….
47% of people receive assistance, maybe that’s true. many of them worked their entire lives; Romney’s wholesale categorization of nearly half our population shows his lack of depth and his disdain for most Americans.
Of those 47% how many worked their entire lives? A good portion, I believe, ergo making Romney’s comment vacuous.
Seriously. C’mon. The 47% is only those who are currently working, not retired people or people who have worked their whole lives. It is not even close to “half our population”.
currently working? 47% is not nearly half?
where do you get your information?
No it doesn’t.
Why?
The reality is the progressive socialists movement have conditioned many of these people to believe they need big government (job security for the workers party) to live.
Just like the propaganda they pass to the elderly.
Its called understanding the reality. If anything Romney is quite in touch and has far more respect for lower income people than Obama does.
If they don’t really vote…why would he care anyway?
he doesn’t.
that’s the point.
You are right about SSDI.The biggest unmentioned scam in the world is people who are collecting for a “mental disability”when there is NOTHING wrong with them.Keep in mind there’s also a large group of highly paid people who need clients that cause no trouble.
SS should be for people that WORKED their 40 quarters (many worked far more)and who have a verifiable physical disability.Problem solved-budget surplus like we had under the last D.
Great points. Many articles now show how extreme Romney’s distortions are in his speech, for instance:
http://pollways.bangordailynews.com/2012/09/17/national/leaked-romney-tape-shows-mitts-misunderstandings/
For one thing, he ignores payroll tax. Many people pay payroll tax (are working) but don’t pay income tax. Another thing–many who don’t pay income tax worked hard all their lives but are now old and on Social Security.
Furthermore, he immediately flip-flopped when caught, like the spineless two-faced uncaring and cruel man he is.
As far as I’m concerned Romney is a tax evading thief that should be in jail for hideing millions of dollars in other countries so HE wouldn’t have to pay tax on His money, I always thought tax evasion was Illeagal?, He’s got alot of nerve talking about people who don’t pay taxes, let alone wanting to be the president of our country. Like spruceDweller says theres alot of older people that have worked hard there whole lives that live on SSDI, something they paid taxes into the whole time they worked.
And you are ignorant of basic facts.
The basic facts are Tax evasion is a federal crime, thats right up there with bank robbery, I don’t want this crook being my president, people like you need to wake up to all the facts, not just the ones you make up in your head.
If you took the time to learn the facts instead of spouting lies you would know that Romney is not hiding any money or evading any taxes. It is not illegal to invest in other countries. Just ask Obama, who has invested billions of our tax dollars in foreign auto companies and wind mill parts makers.
You need to wake up to reality, if you call hideing money in another country so you don’t have to pay taxes on it, investing ?, its a federal crime, I don’t know what I can say that you will be able to understand.
If he is hiding money how do you know about it? Better question: If you know about it don’t you suppose the IRS already does? Maybe just Maybe it isn’t hidden at all and its all politics.
I don’t want to spend an hour copying and pasteing, just type in Romney caught with millions in offshore accounts, the thief got caught, of course he’s going to make excuses, thats what thiefs do, I’d love to see the IRS go after him, never going to happen, wouldn’t that be an embarrasment to our country going after a man thats running for president. I agree politics can get nasty but this man was caught by more sources than one, Im not a republican hater but I think they made a poor choice picking Romney.
Maybe Romney’s not hiding any money or evading taxes, but isn’t it rather hypocritical of him to have a campaign slogan that says Believe In America when he doesn’t have enough belief in America to keep his money here instead of offshore?
exactly
and his veep candidate Ryan just lost the vote of every runner in America with his ‘I ran a sub 2.5 hour marathon’.
what a maroon.
TWO is the size of Paul Ryan’s Congressional record. In his 13 years in Congress, he got only two bills passed. One was to change the name of the post office in his home town and the other, was to modify the excise tax on arrows used in archery.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/ryan/passedbills.asp
From a Man, ( I use that term lightly), who was born on third base and things that he hit a home run! A Guy who deliberately hides money in overseas accounts to avoid Taxes and claims “well its legal” has no business “writing laws ” and or critisizeing those in the low income brackets for paying NO taxes.
The ironic thing about the progressive Tax code is that that lower ( Tax Exempt) income also makes up the base of his own and other Millionaires!
That first $20,000 is Taxed the same for BOTH the Poor and the Rich!
Try living on that $20,000 Romney!!
This Flip Flop, Lying Cheating Miscreant shouldn’t even be allowed in the Whitehouse Dog House!
He would try to strap it on his car and drive off with it to Switzerland!
Its legal.
Blame a person for finding a quicker way to get to work while driving the speed limit.
I am tired of class jealousy.
Be thankful for what you do have.
Your argument is with the people who MAKE THE TAX LAWS (like Wasserman Shultz who has offshore accounts and Pingree who is worth 23 million or so).
She also said the Democratic party has been fighting for equal rights for 200 years, or some such non-sense. Pretty sure “The South” supported slavery, founded the Democratic Party and the KKK.
Yes and now it has become the progressive socialist party, which incidentally, had a bad history in eugenics, and racialism as well.
And we have the Congressional Progressive Caucus having meetings with the Communist Party USA.
How about the Republicans and the White Supremacists? Could you give me proof about the Congressional Progressive Caucus having meetings with the Communist Party USA
You R’s scream about war on the rich, class warfare, what about Romney and his class warfare on the poor? Hypocritical? I say yes.
It may be Legal but is it Moral?
Presidents Sign Law into effect and if he can’t distinquish whats Patriotic, Moral and Good for the Nation he has no business being in that position.End of Story!Mitt Romney—Son of Man!http://mariopiperni.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Romney_Son-of-Man_solo1.jpg
Then get informed. We give $92 billion a year in corporate welfare while $59 billion goes for social welfare programs. Corporations, who are now people too according to Romney, cost the taxpayer more money than the elderly, the disabled veterans, the working poor, and the poor men, women, & children Romney insulted. People who blindly vote for the Republican party do so against their own best interest & against the best interest of America. The tea party extremists have totally corrupted the Republican party by deceiving people into believing the poor and big government is to blame for their lot in life while they edge in and give corporations more & more tax breaks all on the backs of the working folks. Any person who supports this is NOT an informed voter.
Romney may have said it but it’s the platform of the GOP. They could care a less about real Americans – greed is all that matters to them. Shameful and shame on anyone who supports that.
Increasing corporate taxes will drive them from our shores. That simply is not the answer. You’re so busy blaming political parties, you fail you acknowledge the impact of “globalization” is having on us. I’d prefer a “protectionist” government that heavily taxes imports and re-establishes internal manufacturing and consumption. Outsourcing and globalization are both functions of extreme greed supported by liberals.
Romney has a great idea he is pushing, no taxes on corporation profits made out of the country.
If I were a corp. I would be moving as much as possible of my profits and jobs out of the USA, what an idea. NOT
Maybe Corps should pay no taxes, as long as they build and employ in the US ?
This might just get the ball rolling, and get people back to work after the wage re-adjustment.
That would be Socialism.
Actually $451 billion goes to welfare from federal state and local tax revenues.
I can’t find any corroborating numbers for “corporate welfare” after all your tax break might be my legitimate deduction. Yours also I suppose.
Wall Street was bailed out to the tune of over a trillion dollars.
Ok. It shouldn’t have been. Both Bush and Obama conspired together on that fools errand.
Thanks for admitting the huge amount of corporate wealthfare that takes place in this country.
Nothing to admit. Many conservatives were against the auto bailouts and subsequent bank bailouts long before the OWS took up that banner. Thanks for joining my side. You are a little late though.
I don’t need any “stuff” but I am voting for Obama. I think the ignorance is all on your side. I am sure you actually believe that most people who don’t pay INCOME tax (they pay plenty of other taxes, by the way) are just laying around on the couch, but the statistics say otherwise. The myth of the Welfare Queen (also promulgated by the right) is just that, largely a myth. I think it might be YOU who needs to “get informed”.
The truth is people who think like you and Romney cause people like me to vote for the President in 2008 and again in 2012. I have paid income taxes for forty years….never collected food stamp, free housing or health care. There are many others out there voting for the President just like me.
What Romney did was a huge ugly deceit that showed his extreme bias. Numerous articles now show how he majorly–majorly–distorted things:
http://pollways.bangordailynews.com/2012/09/17/national/leaked-romney-tape-shows-mitts-misunderstandings/
Once caught, he immediately flip-flopped and backed down from what he said. He is a spineless and nasty deceiver who cares far more about winning than the people of this country, especially those who aren’t extremely rich.
It wasn’t Obama or Romney voters who made the statement – it was Romney himself. The person who, should he be elected president, will have to represent 100% of the population. Effectively, he said that half the people he will have to serve are a bunch of layabouts.
That’s a bunch of bull. There are many working Americans who support President Obama.
I agree everyone should be informed, but to state “Romney is just speaking the truth…what is wrong with that?” is not informed. You are implying your research and knowledge of what the 47% of the population compiles for which is referenced in the Romney is truth. A speech not well defined in geographical, gender, race, profession, economic, educated, uneducated, social and “class” status by critical analysis; not supported by fact defined by those specializing in cultural anthropology, political science (just to name a few of the experts who spend the lives determining the makeup of our population) was grossly misstated and purported in Romney’s statement.
So I suggest you follow your own advice and “get informed”, really informed! I will never agree to your follow up statement, “or don’t vote”; that would be truly ignorant, giving up one’s constitutional right, any right, to encourage any individual (including you) would be to exercise and celebrate an individual’s loss of democracy! So paraphrasing you, “It is just plain ignorant”.
Susan, a proud hard working, part of the 47% of the population should so proudly speak reference.
Funny, all the layabouts on my street talk about how they vote republican. All the registered democrats I know work and volunteer. Funny.
But also, how does Romney know how anyone votes? I thought that was a private matter.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/federal-taxes-households.cfm
The math.
46.4% paid no federal income tax.
2/3 of those paid payroll taxes (SS & Medicare)
6.9% paid neither – those are the non-elderly, with an income under $20k
10.3% were elderly
less than 1% – others
Many of these Americans also pay state income taxes, in addition to taxes on goods & services.
The majority of those Americans also live in states that support Romney.
What should bother you about Romney, is the fact that he said he doesn’t need to worry about these Americans.
Your whole statement is plain ignorant. Just stop and think the number of people who work every day and don’t make enough money to pay income tax, the elderly who only receive SS and don’t pay income tax, those people who have enough deductions so they don’t have to pay income taxes, people who have lost their jobs and need a little help from the government.
You really need to engage your brain before you begin typing, try it sometime.
And by the way I worked for 55 years and never took anything from the gov. except SS and Medicare which I have paid for and Mitt has included me in his stupid statements. I will be voting for Obama in 2012 not for the nitwit.
Another attempt to vilify Romney for speaking the truth. Nearly half of America pays no income tax while the top 10 per cent of earners pay more than 70 per cent of all taxes. While his statement that 47 per cent of the country receives some kind of government assistance is factual, I disagree that all of those 47 per cent perceive themselves as victims. Some of them would rather not rely on the government but it’s a matter of survival at the moment. It may not have been eloquently stated but most of what he said is true. Mother Jones, why not take a look at Obama’s “record” for a change? Oh yeah, that isn’t part of your agenda.
You are generalizing a whole group because they do not pay 1 tax, just 1. If you include payroll taxes the that number goes down to only 18%. What about college kids that are working a part time job? They are not going to pay income tax, What leaches. What about the social security tax? I am tax on my full wage, but someone that is making more then 106k they are not taxed above that. the top 20% hold almost 90% of the total financial wealth of the nation. The top 10% also control almost 70% of it. So the top 10% pay 70% of the total taxes, but also hold 70% of the wealth, seems pretty fair. We have a presidential nominee that basically says that he doesn’t care about 47% of the nation.
Most poor people tend to be disenfranchised, ie, they don’t vote. Mitt needs to take a sociology class.
Because someone chooses not to vote does not mean they are disenfranchised. What a hyperbolic ignorant statement. You don’t know what disenfranchised means.
disenfranchised:
Disenfranchised means having had your rights or privileges taken away, or being deprived of the
chance to vote. (adjective)
As a journalist you should be aware of the meanings of basic English words. You need a vocabulary class.
According to the Meriam-Webster dictionary, disenfranchised means “marginalized” or “deprived of power” in some way. It doesn’t have to concern rights specifically. You are not only wrong, your statements are geared to maximize cruelty and vicious assault.
You, in my opinion, ought to be banned from these forums by now, for flagrant violation of the guidelines–but experience shows me you wont be. Please try to be respectful and decent. Your hate does nothing but rile up the worst elements of partisanship.
As usual your opinions in that regard are irrelevant.
Definition of DISENFRANCHISE
: to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right, or of some privilege or immunity; especially : to deprive of the right to vote
— dis·en·fran·chise·ment noun
~~~~~ Mirriam Webster
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disenfranchise
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_english/disenfranchise
(as adjective disenfranchised) deprived of power; marginalized: a hard core of kids who are disenfranchised and don’t feel connected to the school
Here is a good dictionary that plainly shows you are wrong. Are you willing to admit it?
LOL You skipped over the first definition in your own dictionary source to go to definition #2
Here is the FIRST definition from your OWN SOURCE.
definition of disenfranchise verb
[with object] deprive (someone) of the right to vote: —-the law disenfranchised some 3,000 voters on the basis of a residence qualification
Do you really not understand that one word can have more than one legitimate meaning?
Yes, except when the word by definition includes that subject.
The definition of disenfranchisement refers to the active act of preventing someone from voting. That is the definition when you use the word in a voting context..
I invite readers to look over your posts and mine and draw their own conclusions. In any case, as always, I would like to remind you that being rude and cruel doesn’t help the quality of the discussion. You would be more effective with undecided readers, if you dropped the viciousness.
The definition of a word is not up for debate. It is what it is and you proved it yourself. Twice.
please re-read my comment; I don’t say that only poor people don’t vote. and btw, many poor people do vote.
Disenfranchised does not only mean someone took my vote away, it also means ‘I don’t vote because I don’t feel like I am part of the system’.
Disenfranchised does not mean that “I don’t vote because I don’t feel like I am part of the system’.” That is BS. It means your right to vote has been taken away by some other force.
Simply because someone chooses not to vote for some reason does not mean that they are disenfranchised. What it means is they chose not to vote. That’s all.
I can explain it to you, Cheesecake, but I can’t understand it for you.
You don’t get to redefine words to suit your worldview. Sorry.
ditto.
Show me a definition from a legitimate dictionary that when referring to voting defines it as you say then I’ll back off. Otherwise You are the person misusing words. Not a good thing for a journalist.
Huh??
Imagine how this conversation would go if we were all in the same room!
I would simply break open the wine bottle (after 5pm of course) pour 3 maybe 4 glasses and invite Sprucie & Singletrack into the library to peruse my copy of the OED. :)
“http://oxforddictionaries.com/…
(as adjective disenfranchised) deprived of power; marginalized: a hard core of kids who are disenfranchised and don’t feel connected to the school” – SpruceDweller
GASP! An acceptable and recognized alternative definition! The horror!
English friend English. Words have different meanings in different contexts. I know its a screwed up language but its the only one we have in common. (Well most of us.)
Well put.
That is your fault…not the governments fault.
I believe government dependency destroys dignity of a person or people.
I think government “preys” upon those vulnerable like this.
This does not mean I give up and feel disenfranchised.
I think even poor people should pay income tax…even if it is $10.00.
Everyone should have a dog in the fight..so to speak.
You’ve drawn the attention of the worst elements of partisanship. Obviously you’re doing something noble. Thank you for your time and comments!
And you are among the least partisan. Funny.
Agree.
“We have a presidential nominee that basically says that he doesn’t care about 47% of the nation.”
What I believe he was saying is that those are more likely to vote for Obama in the general election,ie the probable 47% that won’t vote for him, so they need to focus on the remaining %. While some believe he’s guilty of all the “rich boy” accusations thrown at him, that’s not what he was talking about. It was about rallying for the undecided and the need for campaign $ to sway them.
and if he is elected and gets into office? Then and only then he will care about the 47%.
I believe he was talking campaign strategy to donors and how many voters are likely already committed one way or the other and why. That’s all.
The way he might run the country after becoming President is worthy of discussion and concern, but is all just noise to the topic of why he spoke as he did (in a closed door fundraiser, yet).
It would have been fine if he had stopped there, but to say that there was no way he could make those people be more “responsible” for their own lives? That’s where he goes over the edge. It shows what he really feels about the poor most of whom work hard and are responsible! Disgusting.
Like I already said, those are worthy concerns of a possible Romney Administration and are worthy of discussion, but this was about his speaking to a small group of ‘like minded’ donors behind closed doors. Sweet talking his hand into their wallets as it were.
And that is an excuse? the exact quote: “who believe that they are victims”.
Everyone feels like they are victim of something or someone at one time or another, but you ought to realize how different areas of our country react differently than just Maine does. Here in Boston, mostly in certain neighborhoods, we have a multigenerational continence of dependency on everything from the nanny state. Very few work and have not seen any kind of worth ethic in action. Proud and hard workers who may need the helping hand is not part of their vocabulary.
As far as whether Romney would really show that radical belief in office is debatable (which I’m not speaking about in this particular forum).
Anyone begging, hat in hand, would say EXACTLY what the crowd wants to hear (especially behind closed doors) IS what I’ve been trying to convey. What he said to them was a bit radical which should be considered in the context of where he was. Nobody can actually that a Presidential candidate would run the country with those beliefs.
“There’s some truth in every joke” line may come into play, and I believe that is the case here.
Well, speak for yourself!
There is a world of difference between playing to the crowd (which any politician will, of need, have to do), and in one single sentence smearing half of the American population as a bunch of victimized layabouts. The former is necessity; the latter is a real lack of understanding of people, a lack of understanding about the actual situation, and a lack of principles.
The “crowd” was a small group of money bags, not a stump speech to the masses.
And you are still comparing a helping hand to those in need to a group of people that have lived for generations expecting virtually EVERYTHING from the gubmint! Get off that schtick, and spend a year or so in some other part of the country and you’ll realize there’s a bigger, different word out there that’s not like Maine may be.
I was using “playing to the crowd” in the theatrical sense. I understand it was a fundraiser.
Are you claiming that HALF OF AMERICA are victimized people who expect to get handouts from the government? You should look at the pie chart at this link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/17/romney-my-job-is-not-to-worry-about-those-people/
which gives a breakdown of the 47% prior to answering.
The issue I have with the quote is Romney’s complete dismissal of nearly half the population he may be the leader of – not just to get elected, but in a deeply personal way.
By the way, I live in Winchester, MA, about 1.5 miles from Romney’s house in Belmont. I grew up in Maine. What are those “certain neighborhoods” you speak of?
That’s just it! He only was talking about roughly that many that will probably go D.and can’t be counted on.
I think he was doing a generalization that has turned into this debacle. I certainly don’t believe all the ones getting some sort of subsidy is going to automatically going left (many more probably don’t vote anyway), and neither does he.
A more concrete example: given military pay scales, there are more than likely young soldiers serving in Afghanistan right now, with families and children back home, who pay zero or VERY near zero *income* tax – i.e. they are in the 47%. They may consider themselves Republicans. Romney just called them entitled victims. Thanks for your service.
How do active soldiers taxes figure into what I have tried (ad nauseam) to say. Of course they don’t and rightfully so. Neither do I Any more because of my present income, but I sure payed my share during 35 years of working Never so much as a food stamp has entered my door! So stay on topic. Read and understand the context of what you ‘read’. Over and out
An active duty soldier is a US citizen, same as you or I, who has a well known salary range I could use as an example. That’s all. I’m not sure the point you are trying to make here: the one I am trying to make is I bet that there are LOTS of Republicans who not only fall into the 47%, but ALSO do not accept food stamps, or any other form of aid.
Feel free to pick another example, if you want. Any family with children with a salary of around $40k will have an adjusted gross income low enough to pay NO income tax. That is true, regardless of whether they are a republican or democrat.
I never picked an example whatsoever . YOU did! So stop spinning what I’ve been saying by more injections with nothing to do with our ‘discourse’! Sheese
I just found this on my homepage and will try to give you the link. Bear in mid that I am computer illiterate, but it is an AP ‘fact check’ article of stuff o what the 47% consists of.
http://my.earthlink.net/article/top?guid=20120918/e832a241-4441-4616-bbc2-6c94c306d2ea
Right, so I’m not entirely sure how this works on *your* side of this argument :-) Here is a direct quote from the article:
“According to the Tax Policy Center study, 38 million — half of those who
owe no federal income taxes — escape owing money to the IRS because
their income is too low. For them, merely using the standard deduction,
personal exemptions and other basic parts of the tax code allow them to
avoid income taxes.”
This is another group that Romney claims is “victimized”. Turns out: just poor.
I have already stated that after paying taxes for 35 years (without so much as a food stamp), I no longer pay any income tax due to my low income.
I never threw all those not paying for whatever reason (including well off people using available loopholes) with all the layabouts. I did say that the 47% being victims was a behind closed door fund raising ‘speech’, not meant for public consumption. I don’t believe that any Presidential candidate truly believes all that any more than when Obama made the off the cuff “they’re all clinging to their guns and religion”. Unfortunate, but that wasn’t for public consumption either.
Anyone who hasn’t used hyperbole to get a point across to a small group of friends, raise your hand! I’m still waiting…..
He said during the primaries he does not care about poor people.
No where does he say that he does not care about 47% of the country. He was simply stating a fact that 47% of the country will vote for Obama no matter what. That is a known fact just like it is a know fact that 95% of African-Americans will vote for Obama no matter what. You complain about Romney being rich but so is Obama. You claim he lies, well so does Obama. The only difference is the that mainstream media doesn’t report it. Obama and his administration have been lying to us for days about not knowing that the Embassy in Libya was going to be attacked but no one in the press wants to talk about it.
Adding to his argument about entitlement, Romney said his “job is not to worry about those people.” Refering to the 47% who apparently are not worth consideration because they are simply leaches. I have never complained that he is rich, I do not care. Don’t general half the population because they do not pay 1 tax. If you include payroll taxes, then the number is only 18%.
The “payroll tax” you seem fixated on includes withholding for Social Security and Medicare. According to the Social Security Administration the average S.S. recipient gets back 20% more than they contribute. In other words, for every dollar they receive, 20 cents came from someone else. If you include Medicare benefits, the average recipient gets $3 in benefits for every $1 they contribute.
Social Security and Medicare withholding benefits the individual. Income tax pays for everything else.
Ponzi scheme.
Sounds like you want to eliminate Social Security entirely.
No, but as it exists it is unsustainable going forward. The longer that Democrats bury their head in the sand the harder it will be to fix.
Unsustainable huh? Guess that undercuts your payroll tax doesn’t count argument, now doesn’t it? :-)
It’s not half the population, it’s half of the “taxpayers” or about 18% of the population.
Romney said he was not going to worry about the 47% voting for the President because they did not have a sense of personal responsibility and he could not change their view.
“He added that his job “is not to worry about those people.”
Did you read that sentence…………………….
Here is a Thought!
A buisness owner pays no Tax until he turns a profit.
All of his Subsistance Capital such as Buisness equipment , Buildings , payroll ect ect ect is exempt in some form from income tax because of depreciation / operating costs ect.
Whats wrong with giving a human being the same as a business?
He shouldn’t be Taxed on income to support his existence same as a wharhouse and a factory!
Heres a thought! The business owner will not pay income tax if they do not make a profit! Almost everyone that makes a wage pays the payroll tax. People are paying taxes to suppory themselves, gas? food? Clothing? Property taxes? People pay all these, even payroll taxes. You are talking about 1 tax.
“Payroll Tax” benefits only the individual. You’ll get it all back – and then some. Income tax pays for everything else (national defense, public education, interest in the debt, welfare programs, environmental protection, etc.)
If one pays zero federal income tax it’s hard to argue you’re paying your fair share.
Well, that’s the *theory*. For those of us < 50, it's more theory than fact.
Here is an interesting thought experiment: What is the 'fair share' for someone who makes $20k/yr? Keeping in mind that they must pay the Payroll tax (which, as you point out, they 'get back'), AND state taxes.
I thought I’d do some of the math for you. If your salary is $20k/yr, you pay $1,130 in Payroll tax, plus another $1018 in Maine income tax (from this table: http://www.maine.gov/revenue/forms/1040/2012/RateSched_12.pdf). Your salary is now $17,790. What should you pay that is ‘fair’?
Kinda like GE, huh, who didn’t pay a cent of taxes last year?
Seriously, you people need to inform yourselves. The 47% issue is not that confusing. By the way, why shouldn’t college kids on a part time job pay income tax?
Here is another stat, the top 1% makes 13% of the income yet pays 37% of the tax burden. The bottom 50% makes 17% of the income, yet pays less than 2% of the tax burden.
there is a difference between wealth and income. when you reach a certain level of wealth, you tend to realy less on income. how much wealth does the top 1% own is a better question. the amount of money available is a finite number. the more money being held by fewer and fewer people means that there is less availble to keep a viable economy running, meaning there is less spending power coming from the masses. look at how much wealth the top 0.5% hold or even better the top o.1%. Our wealth distribution is starting to look like a monarchy. I’m not saying that the extremely wealthy are bad or that they don’t deserve what they have. the current trend in wealth, not income, distribution is unsustainable.
You might as well try explaining calculus to a chimp; these folks just don’t understand why a 15%-across-the-board-for-everyone tax will not work.
Exactly, now explain to your friends why Romney pays less “income taxes”, but a much higher “capital gains” tax than the average person. Romney doesn’t make an income. He pays taxes on his capital gains. If you wish to tax capital gains at a higher rate, you risk losing investment. That is why Clinton slashed the capital gains tax rate, because his tax increases were not generating any more revenue. That is a debatable argument, but people can’t blame Romney for paying what he should pay.
Also, when you start talking about taking away someone’s wealth, you are bordering on not just socialism, but communism. Should someone be penalized for saving and investing their money because others decided to spend and waste their money?
i said there was an unsustainably growing gap in wealth in this country. we are approaching wealth gaps similar to Europe when they were living under kings. why is it when someone brings this up, people start yelling communism. I’m ok with people having wealth. i’m not ok with a system that allows people to easily accumulate insane amounts of wealth once they hit a certain level. that is not communism, that is economic sense. wether you agree with the philosophy or not, if 1% of the people hold 60% of all wealth, who’s gonna be spending money to keep the business class operating.
also, you shouldn’t bring up risk of investment and romney in the same sentence. romeny made the bulk of his money at bain with leveraged buy outs. there was not much personal risk with huge reward. that was the point i was trying to make in the previous paragraph: the rules for making money are a little different once you hit a certain level. you and i don’t get to play by those rules and hence there is a groing income gap.
the reason they pay the tax is they have all the money- duh—
“Between 2005 and 2007, the top one-fifth of earners in America earned more money than the bottom fourth-fifths”
What is the difference between people who don’t make enough money to really have to pay income taxes and those who have millions and billions who can get the laws to make sure that they aren’t paying the same 5 that most of us are. Mitt and company want to make that even bigger for the 1%. The republican party is the party of corporations and really doesn’t care about the middle class and definitely not those 47% ers.
They are a party that wants to make sure that those people can’t vote.Democarcy is just a word to them, not a goal! As long as we give corporations billions of dollars in tax breaks.. many, like big oil who really don’t need them, we will be controlled by them in our government. Our votes don’ really count to the republicans, only those of the rich who fund them really matter to them. A vote for a republican is a vote against democracy as far as I’m concerned.
I recommend you look at the pie chart at this link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/17/romney-my-job-is-not-to-worry-about-those-people/
for a *factual* breakdown of the 47% – which includes nearly 30% that pay social security but not income tax (i.e. they are working); Elderly living on social security; and people who make LESS THAN $20K.
Romney is so out of touch with the poor and middle class Americans. He isn’t a good choice for America, he just doesn’t care, I think his main goal is to keep the rich getting richer. His father came to America with nothing. You would think Romney would have more respect for the poor and working class. All you that want to vote for him ask yourself this question first, why? He doesn’t give a dam about you.
Your childish and misguided comments on November 7th should be especially interesting. Romney/Ryan WILL be elected
Hopefully not.. this isn’t about being a republician this is about a person running for president that has no character.
If your only views of this man were developed from what you’ve gleaned from the left-leaning mainstream media who are Hell-bent on trying to take him down, you are not getting the truth. The real story is very illuminating and incredibly impressive. Romney is an honorable man but you won’t read about that in Mother Jones or the BDN. Do your homework.
The media is hell bent? He is doing it himself with comments like this.
You need to do you’re homework. If he cared about America he wouldn’t hide his money in Switzerland and the Caymen Islands. And tax free accounts for his children. Times are tough and you can’t have this one sided. He needs to do the right thing for American pay the normal tax rate of 35% . He is also taking from he goverment. When he is talking handouts, he needs to do the right thing and bring all his assests back here to American.
He needs to invest his money in creating jobs here not overseas. If money is in accounts overseas how are taxbreaks for the rich creating jobs here? If they aren’t investing in their country they should not get the taxbreaks.
Capital flows where it is treated best. As soon as individuals and corporations believe it is wise to investment in America, their capital will return. The better question is: what is going on in America that causes these invetors to conclude it is NOT a wise investment?
It’s the greed of the rich.
Vs the greed of those that do not contribute??? Maybe??
Your statistics and claims aren’t even based in reality. You’re just an entitled whiner screaming because you think you’re getting the short end of the stick. It’s pathetic.
Sure they are. When I produce a statistic you have the opportunity to correct them with your own. You don’t however. That is what is pathetic and is symptomatic behavior of an entitled looser.
Another empty claim by you. You’ve provided nothing. You just have lazy generalizations and then name-calling that has no basis in reality.
I did not call anyone a name. That is a gross over-generalization with no basis in reality. Your postings have become lazy and filled with repetitive attempts at insults. Very dreary.
“symptomatic behavior of an entitled looser. ” – Implying that wolfndeer is a “looser”
Nice too see you are paying attention. Now if for a moment your read wolfie’s posts you will see that I am copying her words.
You claimed not to name-call and then right above it is “looser.” You do act entitled and you have no concept of personal responsibility. You can’t even own up to it when you make a mistake.
I am copying your words. It is your language used by you against others. Do you name call. I used the term in the same context you did.
I didn’t use loser or looser. Take responsibility for yourself.
LOL, like calling half the country entitled takers isn’t a lazy over-generalization? Get real.
Romney is operating within the context of current American Law. There is no space on your income tax form for changing your income from unearned to earned. It fact it is illegal to mischaracterize income. Are you advocating that he break tax law?
Honorable men do NOT put their pets on top of the car to ride, honorable men do not vote against access to elevators for the disabled and then build one for his personal cars, honorable men do NOT ignore nearly half the countries citizens even behind closed doors, honorable men do not create jobs in China and then call the President weak when dealing with them, honorable men do not outsource jobs and hide money to avoid taxes, honorable men have nothing to hide and can show their tax returns,honorable men do not claim they had no ties to Bain while all paperwork proves otherwise,
honorable men do NOT EVER use a crisis to gain political points while Americans are being killed as he spoke without knowledge or thought!!!
True honorable men make good Presidents which is why Obama is sitting there for another 4 years..
Honorable men show their birth certificates.
How many times has Obama have to show his birth certificate?
Only once. If it is the real one.
He showed the real one.
And the president keeps emphasizing this? Almost like he is overcompensating?
I find it a bit strange to say the least.
You do not understand the difference between making light of ignorance and emphasizing it.
What is strange are the ‘birthers’ and from your posts that would include you, so I find you strange.
Honorable people are NOT birthers. Pathetic.
:)
and their tax returns.
Oh boy…where do we start? Seriously? You’re still talking about the Seamus incident from 1983? Yeah, his dog was in a carrier strapped to the roof. Would you have preferred that he eat Seamus like the dog Obama ate when he was in Indonesia?
The elevator thing…please cite an unbiased source to prove this? Everything about this online seems to originate from an agenda-driven left-wing blog. If it’s true, why haven’t we heard about it from reliable sources?
Obama has sent more jobs to China – and elsewhere – than Romney could ever dream of.
Hiding money to avoid taxes? Again please cite a reliable source. Romney did work at Bain and he left the company in 1999. What’s your point?
Using a crisis to gain political points? Again…what are you talking about?
Truly honorable men do not go to sleep after hearing news that their embassies have been attacked and ravaged with possible casualties. That’s exactly what Obama did after hearing the news without knowing what had happened to our ambassador. Add to that the fact that his administration was given a 3-day warning about the attacks and did nothing. If that is your idea of ‘honorable’, you are a sad and misguided person. I feel sorry for you.
It was terrible.
We live in a country where we still have (somewhat anyway) freedom of speech…instead of emphasizing this government believes in that, they made an example out of a Coptic Christian.
*yawn*
But yet Obama supported a GM bailout when they were building 5 new plants in China, Mexico and India….and he is a big supporting of green energy which outsourced millions and millions of our tax / stimulus dollars to foreign countries (Angus King too).
If a person found that it was better to do business in Texas, sand it was legal to do so, than why would anyone call them not honorable, because they were hired to do the best for their people and moved their business to Texas?
Its disgusting the way that Americans have come to believe that Companies owe them a life….this is the Obama mentality.
Its in the best interest of a company to treat their people well, but not be your daddy.
Bain has already been “fact checked”.
People need to take care of other people, and learn to be responsible citizens.
You don’t need to read it anywhere. He said it himself . You can listen to it if you care to face the truth. He is not fit to be in any office except perhaps Bain Capital. I am sure he can find some more pensions and companies to destroy.
agree but that swing both ways. there are a lot of people who think the other guy is a foreign musulm who’s goal is to destroy the country from within. that is information they ‘gleaned’ from the right-leaning media. romeny haters are not the only ones who forgot to do their homework. i met romney when he was my gov in MA. he was an extremely cordial and a really nice person in general. i think he has a very impressive background. the reason i am not voting for him is not because of the fluff campaign stuff stated in this article.
Some of us stated the same about then Candidate Obama…..he is obviously intelligent, cordial, a nice person and has an impressive background…..what the President needs to be evaluated on is his failure(s) over the last 44 months as POTUS…..Mr. Obama stated himself that if he could not provide the hope and change promised in his first 4 years in office, then he should not be given another term in office….
Who you mean Obama.
How about looking at Obama’s lack of character?
If they are it’ll only be because the uninformed believe the lies that Romney’s millionaire and billionaire friends and corporations flood the airwaves with. The rich will do anything to get him elected because they know he’ll protect their sacred dollar. He’s probably a tax cheat or he’d release his tax returns. Just another GOP crook.
So waht if he is rich?
Why doesn’t the president try to teach / bring people up in life (teach a man to fish instead of eating anothers fish) instead of making being financially successful a horrible thing?
Geitner cheated on his taxers….Romney legally complied with the Tax code.
Obama rode and spent other peoples money and is worth around 10 million dollars (possibly more, but its hard to find stats).
Remember billionaire George Soros is a buddy of Obama and Clinton (the nation destroyer through instability of currencies).
At any rate I don’t know how much longer the admisitration can suppress the Obama / Tony Rezco/ billionaire Nadhmi Auchi dealings.
lol, turn off the right wing talk radio
Every one of his points is completely accurate. Why don’t you refute them with facts of your own if you can?
What part of my comment did I indicate that his comments are full of falsehoods?
Take a moment and breath before jumping the gun. George Soros has nothing to do with this conversation. But whatever, maybe we can talk about ACORN too! Oooooh, and let’s criticize Obama for writing a book too!
You passed them all off as “talk radio”… instead of challenging poster with facts. Very Lazy.
LOL, nice dodge.
Also accurate.
It’s not accurate because I wasn’t doing what you accused me of. I wasn’t questioning the facts of the comment. My point is that if your instinct is to screech about George Soros when someone has a critique of Romney, then you’re listening to too much talk radio.
Also, your little “I know you are but what am I?” shtick is getting tired and quick.
Well don’t respond then. You will just have to either live with it or get over it.
Or I can point out how silly it is to essentially reply “I know you are but what I am?” when someone criticizes your behavior.
Or perhaps how you twist and turn when someone points out yours.
Go ahead and debunk his claims. Everything in John Adze’s post is accurate.
Point to the part of my comment where I said or implied that Adze was inaccurate.
Because the President’s job is NONE of those things! He’s not a teacher, nor a minister, nor a personal life coach. And I don’t think anyone thinks being financially successful is bad: as you point out, that is true of BOTH candidates.
But that being said, at least we’ve seen Obama’s tax returns.
Teach a man to fish and he will eat for life.
Society is built on individual responsibility and access to opportunity.
Republicans will then slash fishing education, vilify teachers, reward corporate fisheries, gut regulations on protecting the fishing industry, all the while whining that teaching a man how to fish is socialism.
That will fullfill the Myan Prophecy that the world will end in 2012!
LOL
LOL…
I watched an asteroid pass by earth a few nights ago that was the second unexpected one to pass so close in the last 60 days. It was 300 yards long. Also an unexpectedly large asteroid hit Saturn last week. The Astronomers on the webcast were half joking half serious making 2012 comments. They were/are real nervous.
BTW slooh.com
That`s what they said about McCain/Palin…how`d that work out? Palin said God told her to run but apparently HE had other plans about her winning….Romney and Ryan have zero chance now…Ryan should just force Mittens out and run on his own…he`d probably get more votes without mitwit…
You have no idea how satisfying it’s going to be when Romney and Ryan are elected.
And when you lose? We heard this before….you WILL come back here after you lose right? I do know how satisfying it will be when Obama wins…..I felt it when he won the first time a republican said he wouldn`t ……so I do have an idea! Do you?
Oh yes. I will return and it will be sweet! Hopefully, you’ll be able to piece your head back together after it explodes. I’m not a Republican but I knew Obama was going to win in 2008 and I know he’s going to lose this time. Come on…four years ago, it was John McCain. Not really a fair fight! :) This time, BO is toast. He said it himself….if he doesn’t have the economy turned around in three years, he was looking at a one term proposition. One of the few times I have ever agreed with our President!
*yawn*
Obama 2012
You left out narcissist.
Pays no income tax? He must be talking about Exxon.
Or Government Motors.
Ya, we should have let the auto industry fail…who needs American jobs?
GM could have restructured and built themselves back up. Instead, many billions of taxpayer dollars were handed over only to see the company build 7 out of 10 vehicles outside of America. Ford refused bailout money, built themselves up and are doing very well. That’s how the system is supposed to work.
The money has mostly been paid back.
Yes and no. And now they’re asking for another bailout.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/08/15/taxpayers-gm-investment-down-25-billion/
Not true. The US Government still owns 27% of GM and the stock is performing so poorly the government will never recoup the investment. Then there is the direct loans… which are not paid back but simply shifted over to other government loans.
You lack true and accurate information.
Back attcha!
I said “mostly” and the “price” we pay for the stock the US still holds? A lot of jobs that would otherwise have been lost.
Not true at all. There was NO private money available anywhere. That is why public money was needed. The President saved the auto industry in this country.
Ford was not in the same straits that G.M. was in.
I do not expect the facts to sway your own prejudice.
You’re crediting President Bush for making that move, right? He’s the one who initiated the bailouts for GM and Chrysler in December 2008. $13.4 billion from TARP and $4 billion to be withdrawn later.
I do not have a problem crediting President Bush . I was also impressed with how he tried to deal with the immigration issue.
I completely disagree with Bush’s move on the bailouts and his immigration policy, while stronger and more reasonable than President Obama’s “Come one, come all” approach, could have been so much better.
My recollection was the Bush coughed up about 1/3 of the money for the autobailouts with Obama coughing up the other 2/3’s. Many of us at the time thought both were wrong. GM should have collapsed then a new stronger company could have come back reorganized for productivity. Now we have simply delayed the inevitable.
That’s right – BO cranked it up.
The only expansion GM has done is factories in China.
Just curious, if there was no private money available why did Obama have to steal it from the GM bondholders?
I love sarcasm…you ROCK girl…keep it up! We know they won`t get it but I just love the way they desperately cling to some sliver of hope, kinda sad actually but hey, who are we to burst their bubble until the day after the election and Obama is STILL our C.I.C!! Coming back here to see how many of those Romney supporters come back so we can wipe their tears….
If Obama is re-elected he will STILL be a weak ineffective President.
And those republicans in Congress will still do everything in their power to insure that he will not be able to implement any plan, even if it would benefit the country.
And Obama will still be a weak ineffective President unable to do anything lasting. His only power is executive order which the next President will have to renew or let fall by the wayside.
Most of his proposals as it is have not and would not benefit the country so what is the difference?
“Most of his proposals as it is have not and would not benefit the country so what is the difference? ” – How could you know that a proposal wouldn’t benefit the country if the Republicans block it? Do you have some mind reading power that lets you see into the future of an alternate dimension where all of his policies have been enacted?
Basic understanding of economics and of business cycles.
The current stock market is a prime example. Bernanke is pumping money into the system (to Obamas benefit) . It is artificially pumping up the value of stocks. That is ok with me I own stocks. But I am also positioned to sell in a hurry. I have also taken small short positions. But basically what comes up will come down. The problem with this is that the rich stockholders will benefit and will not lose. The people who will lose are the common people that will get laid off when this new bubble bursts and it will.
Everything that Obama has done is aimed at generating a “bubble” which he hopes to build an economy off of.
Growth, to be sustainable, needs to be organic. One business building off another and hiring along the way to continue the cycle. All of the economic advisers that Obama hired at the beginning of his administration have left along with many he has hired to replace those. There is a reason.
You remind me of the old Beatles song….”Twist and Shout.”
B that you?
You mean the Republican party of NO will continue to do what they do best. In 2010 the Tea Party and Republicans took over Congress. Senator Mitch McConnell announced that the top priority of Republicans was to make sure Obama was a one term President!
In 2012 they want us to believe Obama is to blame.
Republicans killed or BLOCKED the following:
* Tax on companies that ship jobs overseas: BLOCKED
* Political Ad Disclosure Bill: BLOCKED twice
* The Small Business Jobs Act: BLOCKED twice
* The Dream Act: BLOCKED
* Repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”: Multiple BLOCKS
* Anti-Rape Amendment: BLOCKED
* Benefits for Homeless Veterans: BLOCKED
* Affordable Health Care For America: Voted 33 times to repeal
* Health care For 9/11 First Responders: BLOCKED
* The Jobs Bill: BLOCKED* Wall Street Reform: BLOCKED
* American Recovery & Reinvestment Act; Attempted, BLOCKED
* Oil Spill Liability: BLOCKED* Immigration Reform: BLOCKED
* Unemployment Extention Bill HR4213: BLOCKED
What has the Republican Party done for you? See Above!
Sounds like the litany of an ineffective President to me. Thanks for making my point.
;)
GM did fail, Einstein. Now they are government controlled and taxpayer funded. Had the government stayed out of the mess, they would be in much better condition today and would be able to compete without billions in taxpayer handouts. Obama won’t let that happen.
Oh I love Einstein!
thank you!
You really do not know what you are talking about.
GM went Bankrupt. That is the very definition of failure. The US government still owns 27% of GM…
Another popular untruth.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/dec/10/bernie-s/bernie-sanders-filibuster-exxon-mobil/
http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2011/04/exxonmobil-paid-almost-1m-per-hr-in.html
fair enough, I knew I was talking out my butt when I wrote that….easy to tell because I provided no foot note.
Let me get it right this time.
Verizon and GE have a negative tax rate due to subsidies, along with 24 other corporations who in 2010 had a net zero (or below) tax rate.
Yes, they paid LESS than nothing.
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/life-lisa/2012/apr/14/big-corporations-still-pay-no-taxes/
And what has Obama done about this? He has been Pres for almost 4 years. Romney and Ryan actually have stated that they want to reform taxes to close these types of loopholes. Obama has been playing golf and ignoring terrorist warnings in Libya.
You must be partisan.
I vote independently,so your comment seems (dull) to me.
The Romney/Ryan tax plan has been completely debunked by every independent agency who has studied it. Every single one.
Vote for whomever you please, but do so with the facts, not the hatred that you display in post after post for the President.
haha funny, your article actually says, income taxes are not the only taxes paid. The same can be said about the 47%. Heck include payroll taxes and that number falls to 18%
And what percentage is it after the earned income tax credit effectively refunds all the payroll taxes they have paid plus gives them money they never earned in the first place?
Many millions “get back” more than they payed in and that includes payroll taxes.
Exactly what I meant. I was trying to be sarcastic to mero818. In years when my income has been low I actually have been one of those who paid ZERO tax. I got it all back, including payroll tax. And if you do not fill out the earned income tax credit the IRS does it for you anyway. As a “correction”.
“Payroll Tax” benefits only the individual. You’ll get it all back – and then some. Income tax pays for everything else (national defense, public education, interest in the debt, welfare programs, environmental protection, etc.)If one pays zero federal income tax it’s hard to argue you’re paying your fair share.
Strictly speaking, Income tax *AND LOANS* pay for the rest.
Or GE.
He speaks the truth
The poorest states with the most people on welfare are (drum roll) in REPUBLICAN states, I hate to break the bad news to you but the people looking for a handout are in Red states with Republican governors and vote republican…don`t worry though, you`ll retain their votes since red states are notoriously too dumb to know the truth if it hit them in line at McDonalds!
About 50% of Americans pay no income taxes. It’s just a statistical truth. Handouts, bailouts, unscrupulous loans to financially insolvent companies – it is the Obama way. Obama will never advocate hard work – sweat – or tears to succeed in America. He does not know that America. He was, after all, a “community organizer” – one who trains people to live off the fat of the land – ie taxpayers through government programs and subsidies.
but 82% pay payroll taxes! Boom Roasted!
Irrelevant, as that ponzi scheme has individuals collecting more benefits than they contribute.
According to you and the generalizations you cook up in your head.
Consider an average-wage two-earner couple together earning $89,000 a
year. Upon retiring in 2011, they would have paid $114,000 in Medicare
payroll taxes during their careers. But they can expect to receive
medical services – including prescriptions and hospital care – worth
$355,000, or about three times what they put in. […]
The same hypothetical couple retiring in 2011 will have paid $614,000
in Social Security taxes, and can expect to collect $555,000 in
benefits. They will have paid about 10 percent more into the system than
they are likely to get back.http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/02/AR2011010203213.html
So then, what’s your point? You said that the payroll tax essentially doesn’t count as a tax because you end up getting more benefits than what was paid in. That’s true now, but, we’re talking about current tax payers (given that the 47% number refers to a recent tax year). The article you cite clearly states that current tax payers are going to get less back than what they paid in. So why then do you think the 82% figure is irrelevant?
I did not use a 82% figure.
You replied to someone who did and said it was irrelevant. You said the 82% figure is irrelevant because those paying payroll taxes get more benefits in return, then you cited an article that demonstrates that current tax payers (which the 47% and the 82% figure refers to) won’t be getting more benefits in return.
You are right that past payroll tax payers are yielding a slightly higher return, but the current ones won’t be, so you proved your own “irrelevant” comment wrong. It is very relevant.
You are ignoring the medicare numbers.
I’m read the article you linked to and it contradicts what you said! The last sentence of your own quote proves you wrong! You’re getting ridiculous here with all the weird bits of logic trying to argue that somehow so many in this country are takers and not paying into the system.
“Payroll Tax” benefits only the individual. You’ll get it all back – and then some. Income tax pays for everything else (national defense, public education, interest in the debt, welfare programs, environmental protection, etc.)If one pays zero federal income tax it’s hard to argue you’re paying your fair share.
What percentage of that 82% get every dollar paid in refunded with the earned income tax credit and other welfare and income redistribution schemes? And how many more get a partial refund of that money?
Loosen up your tinfoil a bit – Romney/Ryan will be elected and Obama will soon be citizen Obama – kind of ironic since we still have no solid proof he is a citizen………..
Speaking of tinfoil hats, yours has a screw loose…I hope you have a hanky ready your boys go down in flames…
Which polls are you looking at? Which birth certificate did you forget to look at?
Perhaps Romney was born in Mexico.
No big surprise here, it confirms what all have highly suspected of Romney. The one little jewel in all that he said was how he implied that he had a job to do, people to convince, like a task on a list handed to him by the people he works for. It’s pretty clear he’s not working for “The People.” Half won’t vote for him and half of those left are still not convinced.
Didn’t we just endure 8 years of a guy who did the bidding of the same people Romney is beholding to?
Do the Republicans actually want to win this election or are they more comforatble obstructing the Obama administration?
First they make a valient effort to alienate the female vote. Telling them that they should have no access to safe abortion or contraceptives. Now they want to ignore a huge percentage of the population that don’t make over $100,000.00. I know Maine doesn’t have a lot of people making that kind of money. Who else do they want to alienate?
This Romney speach reminds me of Bob Doles statement that cigarettes don’t really cause cancer.
Liberals tend to be more skilled at working the system.
You keep believing that while the billionaires manipulate from on high.
Conservatives know how to hide their money and keep it hidden from the government.
Where do you get that? Did your boyfriend Rush tell you that one?
Berate him for speaking the truth. The absolute, undeniable truth.
It’s the difference between the boardroom and speaking publicly about people, dividing people? this is what we want our politicians to do? Really? The undeniable truth is they represent our country “All the people,” This crew better get their helmets on straight or they will be out of the game before it’s over.
MJ Thanks–finally the subject of “Personal Responsibility” has been stated and Americans understand the difference between earned benefits and entitled benefits
You come across as an Angry Man!
AND I dont blame you one BIT!
Go Getem!
Ohoh tinsrblics off the meds again. Just why would anyone “like”such churlish commentary? Where is the much vaunted hall monitor?
That he`s clueless? Yep, that`s the truth…
Just to clarify things for our intellectually challenged, the 47% number does not include veterans, the elderly, the disabled, children or anyone else who may receive social security, Medicaid, Medicare, etc. If you included those people, the number is more like 18%. (Think about that, 18% of our population has to pay taxes to support the remaining 82%.)
Per the IRS, about 47% of “taxpayers” (those who work) do not pay Federal Income taxes.
http://www.usdebtclock.org Learn.
I don’t think a government generated truth was ever the issue. The truth is the issue created another lead balloon for Mitt to juggle, the best part ….. it’s all self inflected.
THIS IS A SURPRISE? Dems have been trading entitlements for votes for years.Look at Maine’s past.
I love this personally. Hes not talking about Vets and hes not talking about Elderly and extreme disable (like you are really disable not bi polar). Hes talking about the 48% of those that work under 30k a year, have no kids or 10 and have EIC and tax credits. Its not my responsibility to pay for your kids and you because you dont want to do better for you. So before so many in those catagories complain about the rich not paying more, why dont you pay something.
That 47%-48% is not a real number then if you take out the elderly and the disabled. That number shrinks way down to less than 25%. Then that 25% still pays “something” if you use your brain and realize that the federal income tax isn’t the entire tax burden.
/////////
That is because you are one of the people the progressive socialists HAVE MANIPULATED into believing Romney is going to take things away from you (some of the 47%). That is why you will vote for Obama….not because Romney is lying…he told the truth, and you are proving it.
Of course we will vote for President Obama to be reelected. Anyone with a brain who cares about this country would.
OBAMA 2012!
So instead of saying he can’t do anything with the 47 percent who will vote for Obama no matter what he asks Republicans to pass laws to discourage these voters to vote. He does care about these people as he doesn’t what them to vote. Other than that he doesn’t care. They are like that family dog he took on vacation which he made ride on top of the car.
Romney doesn’t care about vets. He didn’t even mention the war in his acceptance speech. Also, it is obvious that many vets are committed to voting for Obama, so that puts them in the 47%.
As usual, your logic is horrible.
“Romney doesn’t care about vets.” Seriously, what color is the sky in your world?
According to the Meriam-Webster dictionary, disenfranchised means “marginalized” or “deprived of power” in some way. It doesn’t have to concern rights specifically. You are not only wrong, your statements are geared to maximize cruelty and vicious assault.
You, in my opinion, ought to be banned from these forums by now–but experience shows me you wont be. Plesse try to be respectful and decent.
Wow, it’s the first time I’ve heard Mitt Romney say how he really feels! Too bad he’s terribly misinformed. Half of those in that 47% are retirees, half of that half still pay payroll taxes (which are a higher effective rate than what Mitt romney pays btw) and the other half of that half are either unemployed or making under 20,000.
What a slime ball of a guy. I’m not worried though, we’re too good of a country to elect someone like Romney.
You won’t get satisfaction from this person. Their tactic is simply to be illogical and cause frustration–and rile up the worst elements of partisanship.
…..
a dependent society will lose its freedoms… I’ll give you a $$$’s if you turn in your guns.
Soon money will be worthless.
http://pollways.bangordailynews.com/2012/09/17/national/leaked-romney-tape-shows-mitts-misunderstandings/
Romney distorted horribly. For instance, many who don’t pay income tax pay a payroll tax instead, and are very hard working.
S
Many who don’t pay income tax are wealthy people who live off capital gains and pay only 15% capital gains tax, which is unearned income. They are also included in that 47% figure. Slackers.
Once again a statement made by a Republican goes right over the head of your basic everyday liberal.
In actuality, I would bet more than 47% of taxpayers believe they are entitled to something from the government. Ask any liberal and they will tell you that health care is a “right”. Am I wrong? Romney is merely stating the fact that he should not waste his time trying to win these people over, because they already think he is the anti-Christ.
Health care is a basic human right.
Agreed and to the point….clearly Gov’t entitlements are the foundation of day to day living for a base of voters who support the current administration and nothing will sway the vote(s) of these individuals…..when one clearly hears what Mr. Romney is saying then this becomes a non-issue in regards to saying he “dosen’t care” about these particular voters…..Crazy….
Another over-hyped & misleading distraction cooked up by a failed president, his fawning enabling press corps (pronounced “cores” for you Obama lovers,) & seized on by the Obama-bots unable to apply critical thinking, logic, or understand the concept of freedom.
lol, yeah! Totally Obama’s fault that Romney admitted he doesn’t care about half the country. So much for personal responsibility, right?
Muah, woofing dear, do you need a hug too?
No need to over-hype, mislead or cook up. The Mittster has time after time shown that he needs no help at all shooting himself in the proverbial foot.
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/08/29/republicans-ratify-positive-american-indian-platform-131868
This Romney speech shows why being a boardroom tyrant is so different than being an effective politician.
And I suppose you consider the current president an “effective politician”? NO, the individual currently masquerading as president is the tyrant.
A tyrant: a harsh and cruel ruler who places his/her own interests above that of the best interests of the general population. Fits BarryO to a “T”yrant.
I guess it depends on what you consider “effective” because from where I’m standing Obama has effectively backed the Extreme Right into a corner, and there’s always room for improving that outcome, I’d agree. Actually the speech should become a standard on how to shoot yourself in the political foot. Bravo well done !
It’s so ironic. Romney criticizes Obama supporters and states that they believe they are victims. Yet Romney screeches about being a maker in a country full of takers (you know, like the elderly, the disabled and those making under 20,000 a year). Sounds like he’s the one who thinks he’s a victim.
Robmey is correct…Except it’s upside down…What about the oil companies, banks, corporations that pay NO taxes and instead get rebates…..As Michael Harrington in the Other America said years ago…”We have socialism for the rich and free enterprise for the poor.” And I am no Obomber fan. He basically agrees with the Repugs on everything…He couldn’t run a bath.
I think he’s really taking about the people called corporations, because many of them don’t pay taxes, lol.
======
Who’s on first?
What?
Who’s on first.
No, Who’s on second…
this is not shocking news at all.. it’s the truth
Mark Thoma has the best data post so far on the execrable Romney speech, linking to the Hamilton Project work on taxes. This work makes a crucial point: even aside from the fact that there are other taxes besides the income tax, even aside from the larger point that lower-income working Americans are hardly grifters, the fact is that the vast majority of Americans do pay income taxes at some point in their life:Thanks to the child tax credit and Earned Income Tax Credit, a fair number of working families with young children pay no income tax; thanks to the exemption on Social Security, many older Americans pay no income tax. But in middle age, close to 80 percent of the population pays income taxes, and even more, of course, pay federal taxes of some kind.
So the notion that almost half of our citizens are grifters isn’t just vile; it’s also based on a complete misunderstanding of tax realities.
Grifter: A practitioner of confidence tricks.
Mr. Romney never said nor inferred or referred to the 47% of Americans who, in paying no income tax, also receive government handouts, are “grifters”. You falsely stated that.
And, Mr. Romney is absoutely correct in stating that the folks he referred to are in some form or another, dependent on government for food, housing, cars, etc. And that we have become an “entitlement” country. These folks have the attitude, courtesy of Ozero and Co, that the government should support them…….socialism anyone?
Of course Obungle & Co will or have made claims to the contrary, and are of couse lying thru their teeth….something they do so well.
Romney is absolutely correct.
Oh, and as to your remark about “thanks to the exemption on social security, many older Americans pay no income tax” that is plain BS. If you had checked, you would have learned that for those of us receiving a pension and social security payments, 85% of our SS is taxable. Folks who have no other income but SS are tax exempt….
Wrong, except your comment that folks with no other income are tax exempt…. these are some of the people to whom Romney was referring ….
It is sad to see you distorting what Romney has said and his destructive polices…..
I stand by my comments, and make no apologies for them. It is true, and you and the rest of the left wing loons cannot handle the truth.
Do not recall anyone asking you for an apology. Think whatever you wish.
The story gives me that dog-in-a-box-on-the-car-roof feeling, you know what comes next, you get hosed off with cold water and put back in the box.
Romney dismissed almost half the country as entitled freeloaders. That just goes to show how out of touch he is. He was born to wealth and privilege, so why does he feel so entitled to look down on middle class, working class, and poor people? Like the late Ann Richards said about GWB, “He was born on second base and believes he hit a double”.
“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,”
Stupid poor people, thinking they should get access to basic human necessities like “food”, “shelter”, and “basic health care”. Why can’t they just take Mitt’s advice and borrow money from their parents?
I think someone who receives a $70,000 tax credit for the care and feeding of his dressage horse has a lot of brass to complain about others who receive money from the government.
Only if informed people don’t choose to vote, or the GOP steals the election again will R&R win. They are out of touch as only the very wealthy can be.
Video of the comments at a private fundraiser earlier this year., from an anonymous source, was given to a pair of left-leaning media outlets, Mother Jones and the Huffington Post. Mother Jones and the Huffington Post altered the video at the request of the source, who wanted his or her identity protected. After originally not disclosing the date and location of the event, Mother Jones late Monday night reported that the event took place on May 17 at the Boca Raton, Fla., home of private equity manager Marc Leder.Ms. Huffington is well known for her extreme left wingl liberal stance and viewpoint. Never heard of Mother Jones. Have heard of Mother Something Jones.
Both rags will use any info no matter the scumbag source. The source can be identified. Identify all in attendance. Eliminate all who donated. Should be all who were invited. Identify all employees. Boca’s a tough place to find parking at a residence. Identify valet parkers hired. Did any go into the residence when all attendees were inside? I’m prone to look at Caterers and their employees. Mr. and Mrs. Leder didn’t cater their own event. They just don’t do that in Boca. What was the camera position location in the residence? That can be identified by identifying all those in front of the camera, probably a cell phone, pinpointing the location of the dirtbag who intentionally recorded this. I’m betting an employee of the caterer.”
Mother Jones altered the video to protect the source.
Well now, there you go. Problem is HOW MUCH AND WHAT WAS ALTERED????
There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what,” Romney is heard saying in the video. “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.”This is absolutely correct. Not only is this verifiable through GOVERNMENT records but there are countless interviews with these twits on the Internet exclaiming they are entitled to all and it pays more than working. The problem is that telling the truth hurts. The liberals, liberal media and the left campaign knows that it is detrimental to their cause and they are twisting it as a affront and a “lie” to almost half the population. There problem is that there is almost more people who don’t work and vote than there are people who work.
So it’s Mother Jones and Arianna Huffington’s fault that Romney said these things? Was Romney the one talking about people needing to take responsibility of themselves? So why are you blaming others for what he said?
Apparently the full tape is going to be released later on today per Romney’s request. You have a little bit of time to start figure out who you can shift the blame to. Get cracking!
Your opinion of the 2 publications is irrelevant. There was no editing of Romney’s stupid comments and they were presented in context. Did you hear what the genius foreign policy expert Romney said about the Palestinians.
The host was Mark Leder .
The reported host of a private $50,000-a-plate fundraiser that has come to haunt Mitt Romney this week is a prominent Florida private equity manager who has attracted media attention for partying with the rich and famous.…Leder, who has given nearly $300,000 to Romney and other Republicans this cycle, used part of his fortune to become a co-owner of the Philadelphia 76ers basketball team and has become a fixture of New York tabloid reports, hobnobbing with rap mogul Russell Simmons and other celebrities. The New York Post dubbed him a “private equity party boy.”In August 2011, the same tabloid reported on a Hamptons bacchanal at a $500,000-a-night oceanfront mansion rented by Leder, “where guests cavorted nude in the pool and performed sex acts, scantily dressed Russians danced on platforms and men twirled lit torches to a booming techno beat.”
he said what he said then doubled down on it in public.
earned benefits is a better expression than entitlements. ask any senior citizen who has paid into social security over a lifetime. of course, republicans fought fdr on social security and johnson on medicare. do you think we should end those “entitlements”?
Damn well said.
Noted conservative David Brooks writes: “The people who receive the disproportionate share of government spending are not big-government lovers. They are Republicans. They are senior citizens. They are white men with high school degrees. As Bill Galston of the Brookings Institution has noted, the people who have benefited from the entitlements explosion are middle-class workers, more so than the dependent poor. ” http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/opinion/brooks-thurston-howell-romney.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1347988004-r6CP7srG9uCeHCx7VfZRXw
Thinking just in terms of people who pay zero in federal taxes, recall that corporations are now legally people. “One problem with the Republican theory is that many big corporations actually pay little, if any, federal income tax. For example, The New York Times has reported that General Electric, the sixth-largest corporation in the United States, earned $14.2 billion in 2010, but disclosed in federal filings that it had no federal tax liability.” Talk about a sense of entitlement!
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/are-corporations-overtaxed/
Everyone knows the so-called red states have historically gobbled up a lot more taxes than they pay, when you look at expenditures. Look it up on google you will see the pattern. It doesn’t make sense that these states are the ones that consistently support candidates that rail against spending of all kinds (except military). But they do. Shows what watching Fox will do for you.
now would be a good time to reopen the question of romney’s tax returns. raise the cloak of secrecy.
Yes it would. Did you see that Romney insisted on seeing 10 years of tax returns from Ryan and the others who he was considering.
Let us not look backward and dwell on BarryO’s past, let us look backward and dwell on Romney’s past.
How very typical and lame of the uber left.
Mitt Romney is correct and I have no problem with his statements. My taxes support corporations that have wonderful tax lawyers that help them avoid any taxation as well as people that don’t work because they have inadequate education, training or there are no jobs available. We, in the middle class simply always have paid and always will pay for those above us and below us, economically, and that’s the way life is. Personally, I don’t trust any politician, democratic or republican to change this typical fact of life. But I’ll still vote for Mitt Romney because Ba-rack Obama simply isn’t trustworthy and lies about everything. Mitt Romney tends to be a straight shooter that actually says something when he talks.
It seems to me that you are voting for Romney because you have disdain for President Obama.
No fair analysis would find Romney to be a straight shooter and those who do follow him, Republicans included, are still trying to find where he stands on anything, save tax cuts for the rich.
Romney tends to be a straight shooter? Have you been awake the past year? He only says stuff like this behind closed doors.
Good summary of Romney:
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-D9sk52pJTiQ/T_SpcuynGAI/AAAAAAAAE_s/ZIT5CWv0eRM/662x1024x7Zz37-662×1024.jpg.pagespeed.ic.5J1rIHBZBB.jpg
Very true. Unfortunately WartGrrl, the left wingnuts and uber left whinners will never understand, and they are therefore lost. Much like the “give me free stuff” crowd Mr. Romney referrs to.
Romney can’t run a presidential campaign no less the country. One mistep after another, on every subject and every domain. Obama will be the next President because republicans once again selected a candidate unqualified for the office. He may have been a CEO but his one redeeming quality must have been some ability to hire good help.
What amazes me is he is stating people who vote for him, expect handouts and pay no taxes. I will be voting for Obama because I believe he is the better candidate. The lesser of two evils. He should really look at what he is saying the wealthy and big corporations use LOOPHOLES to pay no taxes. Look at AT&T they received a tax return and did not have to pay no taxes. Many of the wealthy do not pay there share due to loopholes in the tax code. The middle class and poor pay a huge amount of taxes. I do not get off any year without paying zero taxes to the federal government. I also am dependent on FINANCIAL Aid for college which Romney and his running mate want to “CHANGE”. Make it harder to get aid and put it back into the hands of banks and other institutions with will allow them to deny or set stipulations for people to obtain it. Romney is for the rich and the wealthy and anyone who cannot see past his lies and smoke screens deserves what they get. Look at all the people in the state of Maine who voted for Lepage. Look where his ignorance has led this state. WE are the laughing stock of the nations as people believe the people of Maine are ignorant. He has caused the state money in frivolous lawsuits that could have been used elsewhere. People have forgotten what social programs are for. They are to help people in need. For me I remember not having health insurance and my mother taking ill and racking up close to 600k in medical bills. Individuals have put such a stigma on social programs. What intrigues me is many of the individuals have never had to worry about where they were going to get their next meal or how they were going to heat their home. There are hard working individuals that hold down a full time job and due to “LOW” wages and a high cost of living struggle to live. Some of these programs are aimed to help those individuals out. Yes we need to look into welfare fraud and individuals who are getting assistance that can work but instead of taking an ax to these programs one needs to take a scalpel. If they would only reform these programs, get rid of the waste and stop the fraud it would cut down the cost. These programs are necessary and are helpful in times of need. For Romney to outright state that Obama supporters are lazy and dependent upon social programs is absolutely garbage and is an insult to the hard working Americans that do support Obama. People need to stop and actually listen to Romney and his rhetoric before it is too late. All I know is that I am voting for the less of two evils and that will be Obama.
Then, Mr. Hyer, you will be making a terrible mistake.
If you say so, phantom2driver :). The only mistake would be to vote for Romney but hey this is a free country and you are entitled to your opinion. Though to come back and comment stating that I made a mistake and not backing up your answer as to why I have made a mistake, says allot about you as well.
Cast the mentally challenged, the old, the people who are unable to become employed and have tried in vain to get a job out of the US…and let the rich reign. We were not all as fortune to become millionaires and billionaires and turn our noses up at the left fortunate.
It’s stories like this that give me hope knowing someday actual Republicans might return to their party and take control back from this feckless bunch of political want-a-be rich boys.
You are so delusional. Its time to check into the home champ.
President Obama asked Medvedev (Russia) for ‘Space’ on Missile Defense saying that he would have more flexibility after the election ? I think that comment is ten times more outrageous than Romney saying 47% of the nation doesn’t pay any income tax.
Why.
About time he took off the gloves…No worse than Obuma’s comment about “those who will cling to their guns and religion”….But the left will still get their panties in a knot….LOL…
But candidate Obama did not dismiss them as worthless .
looks like romney’s panties are down around his ankles.
Should anyone be surprised?David Corn is a hero as is the person who made this recording and is now at risk for their life.
Your hero has been forced to admit that some of the tape is missing a key portion.
Faux nuisance is Rawmoney central.
You’ll want to remember that the Universal Product Code, or bar code, wasn’t created by big government, but free enterprise NAFC.
Got Salvation?
Attempted reply to magaleto’s comment 10 hours ago:
“MJ Thanks–finally the subject of “Personal Responsibility” has been stated and Americans understand the difference between earned benefits and entitled benefits”
Flag
I can’t get over all these comments that Romney wasn’t talking about vets or the elderly. Really? You think that what he meant was 47% of Americans are welfare cheats? That’s even worse!
Looks like Mother Jones may have edited the tape.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/19/Mother-Jones-Admits-Romney-Tape-Missing-One-or-Two-Minutes
Mitt Romney it’s not true most of the 47% WORK, guess you just Hate Democrats!!! I worked like a Dog for over 40 years always paid my Taxes , never got any government handouts!! But just because I voted for President Obama Romney calls me and everyone who vote Democratic, bums free-loaders , welfare-queens and all other nasty names !! How Sad!!!!
s
Mitt, just give it up. You’re never going to be elected president. Time to move on to plan B, retiring to the Cayman Islands.
ROMNEY / RYAN 2012 !!!!!
MAINE is a welfare state.
The Man Was Saying The Truth..I know it’s weird to hear such a thing from a politician. But it is!
Mitt has it right, the majority on welfare and
food stamps and those who get those big earned
income checks at the end of the year sure won’t be
voting for anyone who may make them have to earn it.
Those souls will vote for any libber who promises to take
someone’s money and redistribute it to them. But he said this
back in May and NOW it is a big deal? Where is the bigger news
about how this current pres and admin is lying about what really
happened in libya? Where is the real news about how terrible this
economy really is? How about more on the unemployed? How about
telling us why the lies about who attacked and killed our ambassador?
Wait! We will hear how witty the pres was on Letterman, that will
be real news. Can’t wait to hear about Mitt’s dog again, that should
be coming around soon. Aww..pelosi and Obama will make headlines
again telling us how wonnderful it is to be unemployed and on
food stamps.
LOL, Smittens is toast, I like mine burnt so let this draft dodging, chicken hawk keep talking until November.
God Bless Mother Jones and the rest of the free speech loving news people. The same ones the right wing-nuts accuse of Liberal Bias. Without them the truth would never get out there.
You do know that David Corn of Mother Jones has been forced to admit that a key portion of the video is missing, right?
How conveeeeeeeeeeenient.
You seem to be advocating for eliminating SSI for individuals who have schizophrenia, people with early-onset Alzheimer’s, vets with severe PTSD, people who’ve lost cognitive or emotional (though not physical) functions after a brain injury, and anyone whose disability began before they were able to work for 10 years…
I work 45-50 hour weeks for good pay. I support Obama.
My husband is retired from the Navy and a long non-military career, served in Vietnam, supports Obama.
We own our own home, no mortgage. Thanks to our work ethic, we’ve transformed a very low cost “handyman’s dream house” into a lovely home in only 40 years (grain), doing most of the work ourselves. We have food and two cars. We’re voting for Obama.
We have a disabled adult daughter (born with a genetic deletion syndrome) who’s one of those pesky people who pay sales tax but are too poor to owe income tax. Romney despises her. We’re voting for Obama.
Just one more media meme to distract the electorate from Obama’s failures here and overseas.
Mitt said the Olympics security was not up to standard, and though he simply stated facts, the media screamed foor week.
Mitt correctly quoted the percentage of people who do not pay income taxes, and correctly correlated this population with Obama’s base. The media will scream all the way to Nov. 6.
Hopefully, enough sensible people will see through this hogwash.
Romney/Ryan 2012!
“Selective Edit? Mother Jones Admits Romney Tape Missing ‘One or Two Minutes’
Mother Jones, the left-wing magazine that released a controversial video of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s remarks to a fundraiser in May, now admits that it has no full tape of what Romney said, and that its video is missing ‘one to two minutes’ at the most important moment.
The Legal Insurrection blog’s William Jacobson and The Blaze both raised questions on Tuesday about whether Mother Jones had, as promised revealed the full video, given an apparent jump cut in the critical section of Romney’s remarks.
‘Something is missing. Romney’s 47% answer was cut off before being completed, and is not picked up on the Part 2 audio video,’ Jacobson noted.
Late Tuesday evening Jacobson obtained the following comment from David Corn of Mother Jones:
According to the source, the recording device inadvertently turned off. The source noticed this quickly and turned it back one (sic). The source estimates that one to two minutes, maybe less, of recording was missed.
Corn was forced to update his original post, which promised the ‘full’ video, to reflect the fact that a key portion of the video is, in fact, missing.
There is no way to know, without the missing footage, exactly what Romney said. On Monday evening, Romney called for a complete video of his remarks to be released….”
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/19/Mother-Jones-Admits-Romney-Tape-Missing-One-or-Two-Minutes
Romney is standing behind what he said, nothing is missing. His true colors are now out in the open for all to see.
I’m standing behind what Governor Romney said, too.
Then why do you keep trying to cast doubt on the validity of the video?
And what do you think could possibly be in those 1-2 minutes? Do you think he say “LOL JK, didn’t mean anything I’ve been saying”?
Gee, I don’t know.
Governor Romney’s calling for the full tape to be shown, and Corn’s had to back-pedal on his claim that the video was “complete.”
A reasonable person would be led to believe that the missing portion wouldn’t fit the left’s narrative.
Those 1-2 minutes, unless he completely back-peddled his comments, have little to no effect on the other comments we do know about. This is honestly grasping at straws. It is the equivalent of having a puzzle where the final picture is of a duck, but because you are missing that final piece, you say it is impossible to know what the puzzle looks like finished.
So even though you’re blissfully unaware of what the missing portions contained, you’re absolutely positive they’d have no effect.
Who’s grasping at straws?
Still you. Romney said what he said. What ever happened to personal responsibility? Like I said before, unless in those two minutes he completely retracted his comments, nothing he could have stated would change the comments he did make. Besides, you have even stated “I’m standing behind what Governor Romney said, too.” You are trying to discredit the video while simultaneously agreeing with what Romney stated in the video.