17 2 mins 9 yrs

Further to Mahons post, I wanted my say on those comments by Mitt Romney. It seems he has caused outrage by defining many Democrats for what they are;

The Republican told a group of donors that the 47 per cent of Americans who do who do not pay income tax would automatically support President Barack Obama because they “believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it”. “My job is is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives,” Mr Romney says in the video, which was filmed surreptitiously and leaked to Mother Jones magazine.

Let’s leave aside the surreptitious aspect of this – we all know that Dems fight dirty. But rather, let us focus on the substance of what Romney said. He is pointing out that the core Democrat vote are Entitlement junkies. Shock Horror – but what is the problem with saying THAT? Just like the core Labour vote in the UK is generation idle. It seems leftists hate it when they called out for what many of them are. Personal responsibility is a core conservative value and leftists know that in their hearts. This faux offence over Romney’s comments amuses me – and remind me how MANY Democrat voters were planning to vote for Romney again? If we are talking about that all important group of swing voters – let them choose between a Presidential candidate who wants to see the STATE provide their every need (Obama) or a Presidential candidate who advocates personal responsibility (Romney)

Oh, and when we are at it, any update on whether Hillary Clinton has stopped grovelling to Islam yet?

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

17 thoughts on “ROMNEY DAMNED FOR TELLING THE TRUTH!

  1. David- he wasn’t referring to Democratic voters. And among the 47% (please look into what the actual statistics reveal) are senior citizens, people who work and pay taxes (payroll taxes for instance) and the disabled.

    This guy who was born rich is going to teach them personal responsibility? Methinks not.

    This was a political boner than even Romney recognized last night when he found the need to jump into a press conference to explain himself.

    Oh the good old days when he seemed the most sane of the Republican candidates.

  2. //He is pointing out that the core Democrat vote are Entitlement junkies. Shock Horror – but what is the problem with saying THAT? //

    Well, first of all that it is a lie, and a simple look at the figures will show it.

    Out of a population of around 350 million in the US, around 30 million claim part or full welfare in any year.
    In the last US Pres election, over 65 million voted for Obama (the other guy got around 57 m votes). So even if every single Obama voter was an “Entitlement junkie”, R still couldn’t be right.

    But of course the true situation is anything but according to R. I am willing to bet that the areas of high-employment in most or all the major cities on the east and the west coasts of the USA also for the most part voted Obama.

    The “core right-wing” vote on the other hand consists, if those photos of Tea Party crazies are anything to go by, to a large extent of the blue-rinse brigade, pensioners, sundry hang-abouts and the generally unemployable.

    Need I go further and do a quick survey of ATW regulars, who pays most taxes and who
    least, and who supports Obama and who Mr. Foot-in-Mouth?

    I have more than a sneaky feeling that those who support R most pay taxes least.

    (for my part, I also have a more than sneaky feeling that I pay more taxes than the entire Romney retinue put together)

  3. Noel,
    The older component of todays America worked in a very different economy than that which exists today.
    We would have to ask that senior component for their take on today’s situation, but my guess would be that some wouldn’t like what they said, so they would be written off as silly old farts like mois!
    Secondly, there can be no doubt that more people are arriving in America, underground or overground, to stake their claim on the American dream.
    A country which keeps on trying to meet the needs of the disadvantaged, only ensures that more disadvantaged people will pitch up on their doorstep.
    As the UK’s Welfare State has demonstrated.
    Thirdly if you keep telling people they are entitled to the riches of your economy regardless of their contribution to that wealth, you are exploiting them whilst ensuring that eventually the wealth creators will eventually give up.
    Sorry if that sounds negative, but I just felt impelled to respond!

  4. Romney’s point is that the 47% of non-taxpaying citizens have no skin in the game when it comes to Washington DC spending.

    These non taxpaying citizens have no motivation to even look at the national debt numbers – which, btw, is now at a whopping $16 trillion. $16 TRILLION!

    If the Obama Administration can achieve a situation where over 50% of the population pay no taxes – and he’s done a really good job so far towards this end – well….then the US Federal government can expand at whim – adios to a prosperous USA.

    Hence, Tea Party angst.

  5. Good on you Patty,
    Don’t understand all the colloquialisms “have no skin in the game” but I think I get the gist. The basic issue is that if you keep on catering for the poor and needy with handouts or “wealth redistribution” all you guarantee is that you will have more of the same. That’s as true in the US as it is in Europe.
    Which is probably why I don’t believe in outsourcing, because it robs our own people of dignity and worth whilst a small number of people increase their own wealth and influence.
    Look back into UK “50s and see how much of our workforce was geared up to producing consumer goods for the home market. It’s an eye opener.
    Some would say that buying cheaper goods from abroad means you have more disposable income to spend at home.
    But that’s IF you have paid employment, and even then what are you spending the money on? Your own country or some other country whose goods you’re buying because we don’t make them here?

    BTW Did you find my comment helpful or unhelpful?

  6. Patty –

    Romney recently said that he would balance the budget “in eight to ten years”.

    In effect, if his sums add up, and if he sticks by the promise, a vote for Romney is a vote to increase the debt in every one of the next eight to ten years. The debt would be well north of $20trillion then. So it seems that almost all voters don’t give a damn.

    So what should he do? What parts of the government should he shut down? Which corporate special interests should he give the finger to?

  7. Pete,
    Please stop being such an Eeyore and use that formidable intellect to find solutions, not more problems.

  8. Romney might want to take a look at where those 47% of tax leeches live.

    — 53.6 percent of households pay the federal income tax. Presumably Romney is okay with these folks.

    — 28.3 percent of households pay no federal income tax, but they do pay the payroll tax. That means they don’t need Mitt Romney to convince them to “take personal responsibility and care for their lives.” They already have jobs.

    Most of the households in this group don’t pay any federal income tax because they qualify for enough deductions that their income tax liability has shrunk to zero. See this Tax Policy Center report for more, which gives an example of “a couple with two children earning less than $26,400. They get an $11,600 standard deduction and four exemptions of $3,700, and that takes their liability to zero.”

    Indeed, it’s worth noting that many of these deductions and credits were part of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts, which Romney wants to extend.

    — 10.3 percent of households pay no federal income tax because they’re retired and elderly. Many retirees aren’t taxed on their Social Security benefits, which they earned by paying into the system over many years. If Mitt Romney secretly thinks that these households are all irresponsible freeloaders, he has a weird way of showing it, as he keeps insisting that he doesn’t want to cut Medicare or Social Security benefits for those over the age of 65.

    — That leaves 6.9 percent of households which are non-elderly and have incomes less than $20,000 per year and aren’t paying the payroll tax. These poorer households pay neither income taxes nor payroll taxes. Perhaps Romney thinks that they should all pay more in federal taxes. It’s hard to say. But this is also a much smaller fraction of Americans.

    Source

    Considering the fact that Mitt paid an effective rate of 14% (10% less than we paid) the last two years, writes off his wife’s hobby horse to the tune of $77,000 and shelters his income tax liability with off-shore accounts, I’d say he has some brass.

  9. Romney might want to take a look at where those 47% of tax leeches live.

    — 53.6 percent of households pay the federal income tax. Presumably Romney is okay with these folks.

    — 28.3 percent of households pay no federal income tax, but they do pay the payroll tax. That means they don’t need Mitt Romney to convince them to “take personal responsibility and care for their lives.” They already have jobs.

    Most of the households in this group don’t pay any federal income tax because they qualify for enough deductions that their income tax liability has shrunk to zero. See this Tax Policy Center report for more, which gives an example of “a couple with two children earning less than $26,400. They get an $11,600 standard deduction and four exemptions of $3,700, and that takes their liability to zero.”

    Indeed, it’s worth noting that many of these deductions and credits were part of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts, which Romney wants to extend.

    — 10.3 percent of households pay no federal income tax because they’re retired and elderly. Many retirees aren’t taxed on their Social Security benefits, which they earned by paying into the system over many years. If Mitt Romney secretly thinks that these households are all irresponsible freeloaders, he has a weird way of showing it, as he keeps insisting that he doesn’t want to cut Medicare or Social Security benefits for those over the age of 65.

    — That leaves 6.9 percent of households which are non-elderly and have incomes less than $20,000 per year and aren’t paying the payroll tax. These poorer households pay neither income taxes nor payroll taxes. Perhaps Romney thinks that they should all pay more in federal taxes. It’s hard to say. But this is also a much smaller fraction of Americans.

    Considering the fact that Mitt paid an effective rate of 14% (10% less than I paid) the last two years, writes off his wife’s hobby horse to the tune of $77,000 and shelters his income tax liability with off-shore accounts, I’d say he has some brass.

  10. BTW Did you find my comment helpful or unhelpful?

    Your comments are about as helpful as catching AID’s

  11. Agit8ed –

    Do I talk Swahili? I’ve been telling GOP drones and Americans in general what their solutions are, or were.

    The slower, less exciting one was Ron Paul, but GOP drones prefer Mitt the Magnificent.

    The faster one is to reject both of those evil, corrupt, fascist, warmongering, corporatist, inflationist factions.

    The fastest, most dramatic solution is to wholly and completely repudiate the debt. The American people did not sign those contracts and promise to repay the debt. It is not theirs.

    Standby for my next attempt: secession.

    The sensible thing for the sovereign, independant states (well, the solvent ones at any rate) to do is to secede from the Union and I wholeheartedly encourage it.

  12. Thank you Daphne. Additionally, the idea that all of those 47% (especially the 10% who are elderly and retired) are all on Obama’s bandwagon is pretty laughable.

Comments are closed.