E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Updated 11:32 a.m. - DANVILLE, Va. -- Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan told an NBC News affiliate in Reno, NV, Tuesday that while Mitt Romney’s comments during a private fundraiser were “obviously inarticulate,” the point he was trying to make was valid.
“He was obviously inarticulate in making this point,” Ryan said in an interview with KRNV. “The point we’re trying to make here is under the Obama economy, government dependency is up and economic stagnation is up, and what we’re trying to achieve is getting people off of government dependency and back to a job that pays well and gets them onto a path of prosperity.”
Ryan, Romney’s top surrogate on the campaign trail, did a slew of interviews Tuesday -- the day after a video leaked of Romney speaking at a private fundraiser in Florida from May during which the GOP presidential nominee argued that people have become too dependent on the government under President Barack Obama.
Recommended: Obama hits 50 percent
Asked if Romney regrets what he said, Ryan responded: “Oh, I think he would have said it differently, that’s for sure, but the point still stands. We have too many people becoming too dependent upon government because of the poor economic policies of the Obama administration.”
The former Massachusetts governor acknowledged during a press conference late Monday night that the comments, first published on the liberal site Mother Jones, were “not elegantly stated,” but again stood by his claim.
Priorities USA, a pro-Obama Super PAC, already has a television ad set to air in six battleground states seizing on these comments by the GOP presidential nominee.
Speaking at a campaign rally here in southern Virginia 48 days before the November election, Ryan continued to attack Obama’s economic policies.
“President Obama said that he believes in redistribution,” he said to a booing crowd. “Mitt Romney and I are not running to redistribute the wealth, Mitt Romney and I are running to help Americans create wealth.”
The Wisconsin congressman continued: “Our job is not to fight over a shrinking pie in redistributed slices, our job as leaders is to grow the pie so that everybody has a better shot at the American dream, and everybody can pick themselves up."
The Obama re-election campaign disagrees.
“Congressman Ryan talked a lot about redistribution today, which is exactly what he and Mitt Romney are proposing to do if elected. While President Obama cut taxes for the typical middle class family by $3,600 over his first term, the Romney-Ryan plan would actually raise taxes on the middle class by cutting deductions like those for mortgage interest and charitable contributions in order to cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires, Obama campaign spokesman Danny Kanner wrote in an email. “That's certainly not a plan to strengthen the middle class - it's a plan to turn hard-earned middle class income into special breaks for the wealthiest."
Wednesday’s visit to the Commonwealth marks Ryan’s 10th event over eight days campaigning here – more than any other state.
“Virginians hold the key to this. You have a big responsibility. You want your country back,” Ryan told the roughly 900-person crowd outside Piedmont Precision Machine. “You have a big responsibility and Virginians it is in your power to do that.”
Leave a Comment:
Good to see the dynamic duo, won't back down!
They need to ride their warped beliefs of America all the way to the election!
I'm curious as to whether or not those workers behind Lyin Ryan, at his rally were forced to attend or lose their jobs like the coal miners in OH...
The same coal miners who after attending, found out they were docked a days pay to sit through that @!$%# show!
Romney tends to spray insults and gaffes at will....his EEK commments in Israel, and to the British P.M. about the Olympics on the very eve of the Opening.
And what's worse, Romney probably has no idea how it happens = a total NONO for President.
Now is not the time to install RomneyRyan/Adelson/Norquist and their 0.01% pals in the White House, and so they can double down on inequality in this country.
Youtube:
Obama In 1998: "I Actually Believe In Redistribution"
Redistribution of wealth is one of the principles of any government. The fact you tote this off as something bad and unheard of shows how ignorant or uneducated you are.
Inarticulate? Ha. Romney doesn't UNDERSTAND the country he lives in.
He's been too busy counting his GOLD to pay attention.
I think miners are more in danger of losing their jobs because of Obama's energy policies.
I'm going to write in John Huntsman on the ballot....... Either that, or this Republican isn't going to vote at all....
It certainly is not the role of our govt. Our govt is to protect us from foreigners and make sure our god given rights are secured. No where in our constitution does it say anything about redistribution. You sir are ignorant and thats the problem with you loons is you want to take something from someone who earned it and just give it to people who havent worked for it.
no its not. we've done this before. Taxes are needed in order to sustain gov. Redistribution of wealth is the priniciple of a socialist/communistic government. quit lying
says the pot to the kettle
LMFAO. You haven't even read the Constitution or you'd see it right in the Preamble, Article I, and 16th Amendment (and I'm sure in even more places). Are you illiterate?
Nice try, this may be a principle of your government but not Americas. Sponge.
Paul Ryans' defense of Romney's remarks makes alot of sense - unless you actually see the tape, and then you realize that isn't at all what Romney said.
Who wants to bet Ryan is asking his aides "how'd I get stuck running with this idiot?"
Promote welfare does not refer to stealing from joe to give to jack. you can try to spin it, this country was built on fact that everyone has rights that enable them to achieve as much or as little as they please without infringeing on others rights. quit making shat up
preamble says nothing dummy
Amendment XVI The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever sources derived, without apportionment among the several States , and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Do you understand how goverment works? You think the goverment can generate the monies needed to operate without taxes? But you somehow have correlated that to weath redistrubtion from the wealthy to the poor. What a commie.
I think Jean Luc here is stuck in a paradox known as a casuality loop
Income tax is constitutional. Please try again with a more educated approach. Wishful thinking, I know.
Actually, the redistribution of wealth is one of the things that the tax code was designed to do in order to prevent the accumulation of power in the hands of very few.
The redistribution of wealth, to the extent needed to give everyone a shot, actually is a good thing.
The alternative is the Republican long term solution for the poor: (and women, and veterans, and
the disabled, and the elderly) DIE YOU MOOCHERS, DIE.
Ceasar Agustus: the Romney/Ryan tax plan: Give to the wealthy, take from the middle class until there is no middle class, let the poor DIE.
Xabre The right like to talk about the Constitution like they know it. But when it comes tome to walk the walk they can't because they have not read it.
So where does it say to redistribute to the lazy asses of our society?
And Dirp, redistribution of wealth helps the economy as a whole, and therefore even helps those at the top. Of course, many GOP trolls here cannot even properly examine situations right in front of their faces; asking them to examine an entire topic would be way too much.
Income tax was implemented to help the country bury soldiers and mend the country after the civil war and was never to exceed a certain % of ones income less than 5% actually. You keep calling others uneducated and you are making outright lies and trying to pass them as being factual.
Inarticulate matches a man whose second language is Conservatism........a wannabe. Points taken.
Before the convention, I was joking that they whould bill the Willard and Eddie Munster show as a Creature Night Double Feature. Who knew I would be so close to the truth!
Anyone catch that part of the tape where Willard was giving the Iranians tips on how to blackmail the US? Whose side is this clown really on?
Amy -- You give Ryan too much credit! Ha!
Xabre
What nonsense is Xabre talking about. Did you not read what distribution means. First you take from the rich, then form the middle class and before you know it we have one King and only subjects.
This is Berraco Obama's plan. Wake up and smell the roses.
However, the effort of the Obama campaign is to keep the focus on Romney and off his growing list of failures.
Economy - Target was unemployment under 6% by now
Foreign Policy - Mid East even more hostile to the US and Iran moving towards obtaining the bomb
Education - Teachers Unions completely against the Administration's policies
Fiscal Policy - No longer longer borrowing to cover the deficit now the Fed simply buys bonds by printing money
Afghanistan - Completely in tatters
Obamacare - In disarray
So keep the distraction going because the President has NOTHING else to run on.
Yes. So eminent domain (one feature of redistribution of wealth prominent in our society for many years) is really just catering to "lazy asses". You really need to get your "lazy ass" to school.
For all the right wing koolade drinkers (you know who you are), Romney is hyper critical of those not paying taxes-because of tax breaks in the tax code- and yet this lying, hypocritical and immoral pseudochristian pays less than 14% in taxes because of the breaks in the tax code. What do you say about that?
poor Xabie, just dont know when to stop. please tell me you understand Eminent Domain. Just say you are a commie supporter. I know Xabie won't respond. Jean Luc has me on ignore.
Alan -- What's Romney running on? In four years he says he'll bring unemployment down to 6%. The EXACT number most economists and the CBO report will happen regardless of who is President.
He claims 12 million jobs will be created with his policies. Really? Again the same number that the economists and the CBO report regardless of who is President.
He says he NEEDS 8 years to bring down the debt and deficit. Obama can do the same.
Mittens and Queen Ann believe in redistribution of wealth too. From us to them.
I say that he pays that rate because its long term capital gains tax rate moron. People used to be taught to invest invest reinvest the divedend that way when they retire they could live off the divedend and pay 15% tax. If you invested or even understood that concept it would make sense to you
You cannot even properly spell 'dividend' and you want us to think you know @!$%# about investing?
He claims 12 million jobs will be created with his policies. Really? Again the same number that the economists and the CBO report regardless of who is President.
Not his fault obama claimed he could do it in four. What you should realize is that the current admin has zero idea how to asses the economical situation. I am for giving someone a shot and trust me, if it isnt better in four ill vote someone else. I dont care who does it but economy needs to get better for all of us and history has shown that taking from rich and give to poor does absolutely nothing to help an economy
And how exactly is Obama planning to get "elected" for that third term?
So he has CRAP objectives.
Concise
Realistic
Achievable
Performance Measurable
What objective has Obama hit in the last four years? As Clint articulated, if you hire someone to do job and they don't do it you fire them. Even Obama said the same thing four years ago. As bad as Romney has been as a campaigner he is the only realistic alternative to the incumbent, who by his own standards has not done the job.
excuse my misspelling, but with your theory you misquote constitution and want us to believe your some expert.I am quite sure i could run circles around you in the investment arena
And anybody that makes over $ 200,000 is rich. He is a socialist , redistributionis, who claim the Government ownership of the succes , in that way is easier to demand for more.
Yes, I misquoted the Constitution when I said outlines income taxes and eminent domain, two features of 'redistribution of wealth'...oh wait. Made plans to take those civics remedial courses yet? You have a dire need for some education. Of course, stupidity is GOP mantra; no wonder Rick Santorum feels the GOP will have "the elite, smart people on our side".
When one has to go back 14 years to drum up something about redistribution to counteract a campaign KILLING video Romney was caught on, then this race is OVER. Romney dismissed nearly half of Americans and came off as a cynical CEO talking out of the earshot of his employees!! Americans are looking for an optimistic president, not one who looks down his nose at half of America and only will work for his half! He will never be able to live this video down, especially not in 48 days!
Speaking of redistribution: Isn't that what is happening now with oil company subsidies and agricultural subsidies for major food corporations who bought out hundreds of Mom and Pop family farms to cash in on free Government money? Why are there no cries about that on the right? That's an ongoing multi-million dollar redistribution of taxpayer money to me!
Oil Shark, Xabie boy here is a class A screw up. Xabie is wrong and the more you argue, he'll drag you down to stupidity and beat you with experience. Xabie has me on ignore because I've gone through this exact argument with him before. In the end he doesnt grasp wealth redistrubtion vs taxing income. His thinking is screwed
The point still stands........
WHAT AMERICA NEEDS IS A PRESIDENT THAT GIVES THE TERROISTS IDEAS ON ATTACKING US....
Xabre you actually said.
You did not say outline anywhere here. Say what you want but i am confident i am contributing more to society financially than you are. Only people like you think its ok to make a car for 89k using tax $ from people like me to sell you a car for 40k because you want to hug tress
Alan -- LOL.
REALISTIC? C'mon your pushing it! The guy's a ROBOT.
CONCISE? That couldn't be further from the truth. Ha!
"I'm not familiar precisely with what I said, but I'll stand by what I said, whatever it was." —Mitt Romney (May 17, 2012)
ACHIEVABLE? That's not difficult when it's already on track to happen.
PERFORMANCE MEASURABLE? HE gets an F.
some are suggesting that the Constitution's use of the word "Welfare" is supportive of the redistributionist policies of this administration. Verbicide is rather common among many on this site and so it seems appropriate to advise what the meaning of "welfare" was in 1787 (with the current definition shown first*:
When modern Americans hear the word “welfare” most think of, “relating to, or concerned with welfare and esp. with improvement of the welfare of disadvantaged social groups” and “receiving public welfare benefits.” (Merriam-Webster’s 10th Collegiate Dictionary)
That definition of “welfare” would have been unknown in 1776. Welfare was, in truth, the exact opposite of poor relief. If you have “welfare” today you would be on the government dole. If you had “welfare” in 1787 you had health, wealth and happiness. Such a system of government aid would only have been known as “poor relief” and a law requiring a tax to support “poor relief” would have been called a “poor law.”
*Source: Christopher Hansen
“You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot help the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by encouraging class hatred. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn. You cannot build character and courage by taking away man’s initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.” —Abraham Lincoln
Smitty, republicans pick and choose what they like in the Constitution and the Bible. They disregard the parts that don't fit into their irrational little world.
red -- spot on. of course Lincoln was a republican so wait for the lefty libs to start hammering on him now.
Considering you have less of an education than the employee making my lunch at Subway, I'd highly doubt that.
Before FDR, the Republicans were liberals, and the Democrats were conservatives. Maybe you should learn your history.
Dear redvirginia and billybob, that quote was not made by Abraham Lincoln. Get informed, please. http://www.snopes.com/quotes/lincoln/prosperity.asp
Obama/Biden 2012
Cynthia's Point - they are really having citation issues over the last couple days. They are pulling in faulty quotes from Ann Landers and National Enquirer as valid talking points. Can't wait to see them start citing the Gerber Baby - Goo Goo Ga Ga.
Cynthia . As a good conservative in an adult discussion , it's belong to William John Henry Boetcker, I accept the misquote but still is valid. However Lincoln said this.:
"Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another; but let him labor diligently and build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence when built" .
For the matter of the discussion have the same meaning.
Ryan..... you and Romney deserve each other. America deserves better. As a responsible Republican I will be voting to re-elect this year. Maybe next time they will nominate someone that has America's best interest at heart. Probably not tho.
"Redistribution of weath" by the government is a fascinating subject.
Providing opportunities for oil companies to drill on land that belongs to the public is a redistribution of resources (weath) to private enterprise. The provision of land grants to railroad companies was a redistribution of resources (wealth) to private enterpise. The eminent domain and seizure of private property by a government to sell it at below market value to private developers (Kelo v. New London) is a "redistribution of wealth." The provision of ferderal aid to Galveston, Texas on multiple occasins after being impacted by hurricanes (and yes, Rep. Ron Paul voted in favor of this assistance) is a "redistribution of wealth."
In all these cases, the argument in favor of this redistrubtion of wealth was that it was for the "benefit of society."
And guess what, the redistibution of wealth in the form of tax dollar (which is simply just another resource) funded welfare, TANF, etc. to people and states is completely acceptable not only based on our history but based on the concept of "benefit to society."
Get over and give up the redistribution of wealth argument. It's a loser when you look at the facts.
Ryan should know about government dependency since he was on the government teat (and didn't need to be since he came from wealth). He is a liar and a "taker." He doesn't deserve a chance to be in the white house to take what little we have.
Right On Romney!!! Tooooooo many people in the cart and not enough pulling it!!! WAKE UP AMERICA!!! Take responsiblity for yourselves! If you want someone else to carry you move to Russia or China!!! This is AMERICA!
A Progressive or
Communist Government cannot permit an armed population. They will first ask
nicely for you to turn in your weapons, saying the action will reduce crime.
Our Socialist friends in England successfully implemented this plan several
years ago. After WW2, the British made a left turn. I think the English also
attempted that same plan to confiscate weapons here in America back around
1776. How well did that program work out? After the failure of the voluntary
weapon surrender, Obama strikes into action. The Thugs of the “OCDF” Obama
Civil Defense Force, Moslem Brotherhood, SEIU members and “The New Black
Panther Party” with GPS coordinates of the address to your front door gathered
by Obama’s Census Worker’s, sweep down in the middle of night, like a horde of
Mongols, confiscating weapons and ammo. This night, known forever as “Up
Yours”, went terribly out of control. The Thugs not only stole guns and ammo,
but food, gold, silver, diamonds, other personal property and liberty. I
learned a valuable lesson from the gun safety instructor. He said” that when
the government comes for your weapons, give them the ammunition first”. This
proves that I did pay attention in the gun safety class. There were many nice
ladies in this class. A pistol packing Mama is sexy thing. In this instance
caliber does matter.
For you who dislike President Obama and the 47%, you must really hate these guys. They actually created most of the dreaded 47%ers.
"When Ronald Reagan signed into law the Tax Reform Act of 1986, he boasted, “Millions of the working poor will be dropped from the tax rolls altogether, and families will get a long-overdue break with lower rates and an almost doubled personal exemption.”
Both the initial Reagan tax cuts of 1981 and indexing income taxes to inflation in 1985 had a similar effect.
In the 1990s, the Republican-controlled Gingrich Congress passed a $500 per child tax credit that also wiped out the income tax liability of many low- to moderate-income households.
“Fully 93 percent of the tax relief in our bill goes to taxpayers with annual incomes under $100,000, 76 percent goes to taxpayers with incomes under $75,000,” then-House Ways and Means Committe Chairman Bill Archer, a Texas Republican, said at the time. “If ever there was a tax plan for America’s forgotten middle class, this is it.” (Business Insider)
Since the Republicans got us here why would anyone believe they will get us out?
What will happen when our money runs out, Obama?
“Takers” conversation on
October 8, 2009 with Ken Rogulski reporting on WJR in Michigan
Rogulski: Why are you here?
Taker Female #1: To get some money.
Rogulski: What kind of money?
Taker Female # 1: Obama money.
Rogulski: Where’s it coming from?
Taker Female: Obama.
Rogulski: And where did Obama get it?
Taker Female #1 I don’t know his stash. I don’t know. (Laughter) I don’t know
where he got it from, but he givin’ it to us, to help us.
Taker Female #2 and we love him. That’s why we voted for him!
Taker’s (chanting) Obama! Obama! Obama! (laughing)
This unfortunately
represented the views of the “Taker’s” in the good ole days when every thing
was given and nothing was expected except your vote for the Progressives.
“Takers” conversation on October 8, 2012
with Ken Rogulski reporting on WJR in Michigan. “Them Chickens have come home
to roost. “
Rogulski: Why are you
rioting?
Taker Female # 1 No Damn welfare
Taker Female #2 We worked for it!
Rogulski: You worked for it?
Taker Female #2 Yea, we supported Obama, the Democrats
Rogulski: Why steal, murder, rape and plunder?
Taker Female #1 They said, we didn’t have to
Rogulski: Have to what?
Taker Female #1 Work!
Rogulski: Where did the money come from?
Taker female #2 I don’t know, Obama’s Stash
Takers (chanting) We earned it, we want it,
give it to me!
Rogulski: Stay back, I didn’t do anything!
Rogulski: Help! Help! (Gurgle sound, inaudible, silence)
Takers(s): We got Whitey, we’ll get Zimmerman!
Don't get confused by the redistribution of wealth when you claim it goes to businesses. They are creating jobs, they are providing products and services to everybody. Redistribution of wealth with entitlements to people that do not want or have the motivation to provide it themselves does nothing for crating jobs or providing goods and services to the people. It's just socialism at it's worst!
Ryan misleads when he calls this the Obama economy.
It is more accurately "the economy Obama is fixing".
When comparing performance it is useful to have the same starting line and finish line for all participants. It is what makes a race fair.
Romney has no record managing an economy, so I will leave him out of this.
Bush inherited a budget surplus and 8 years later left with a budget deficit of $1.3 trillion. Obama inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit and 3.75 years later it is $1.1 trillion.
Bush inherited an unemployment rate of 4.7% and left office with it being 9.3%. Obama inherited an unemployment rate of 9.3% and 3.75 years later it is 8.1%
Bush inherited a monthly jobs gain rate of about 0 (.com bust recession was beginning) and left office with it at -800,000. Obama inherited a monthly jobs gain rate of -800,000 and 3.75 years later it is nearly 100,000.
Bush was able to pass two stimulus/tax cut bills and start two wars. Obama was able to pass one stimulus bill and end one war and begin to wind down another.
Bush inherited a stable and profitable banking and auto and housing sector and left with them in shambles. Obama inherited a banking, auto, and housing sector in shambles and all are stable and growing now.
So, you be the judge. Is this Obama's economy or the economy he is fixing?
Jim #'s-- You do understand that everyone is a job creator, right? Consumers make up 70% of GDP growth.
With that said you must also understand that business NEEDS the worker to help produce the goods and provide the service. Not everyone is going to be a business owner.
Get off your soap box.
Nice posts Matthew, vwterry and shaak!
Where have I seen this comedy sketch before?
Oh, yeah. 2008. Saturday Night Live.
Be sure to check QVC for the "Ryan 2016" T-shirts.
Are you serious? It isn't socialism. Giving people the means to make a decent living for themselves is the best investment you can make in an economy. Even if you just gave it away, it would still be better at stimulating economic growth than what is happening now.
What do you think the people to whom the wealth is"redistributed" do with it? They buy food, refrigerators, TVs, smart phones, prescription drugs, and a whole variety of other products that stimulate the economy and create jobs. They are not generally rich enough to squirrel their money away, so more of it stays in circulation. Circulation through the economy stimulates even more growth, which in turn creates more jobs.
What do you think the wealthy will do with their money if it is not "redistributed"? Because there are so many fewer of them, they will never be able to make up in demand for what they have taken away by hoarding it all to themselves. Mitt Romney is a prime example of a wealthy person who hoards his wealth and does not re-circulate it in the economy.
Taxation addresses that exact issue, and in some ways, the right tax policy actually stimulates growth.
Let me put it to you in words you can understand --
Twenty people making $50,000 a year will buy lots of stuff. One person making a million dollars a year will buy a lot less and squirrel a lot more away, where it does no economic good for anyone else but that person.
This is basic Econ 101.
Where did you study economics, anyway, Mr. Wizard? It seems obvious that you don't know how it works.
And neither, in the end, does Mitt Romney.
The 47% include:
Seniors who have worked their entire lives and now live on SS that THEY PAID for.
Our military soldiers, fighting for our freedom, who do not pay income tax on their combat pay.
People who WORK, but do not make enough money to pay income tax after child deductions... but they WORK.
College students who are also WORKING part time, but do not make enough to pay income tax... they still WORK.
Disabled citizens who are physically unable to work.
THESE ARE THE 47%
Now... Republicans feel that ALL of these people are lazy, worthless, pieces of s***. Republicans HATE these people. Republicans look down on these people, as victims who live off the government and expect a handout.
THESE ARE THE 47%
These are the people that Republicans insult. People that work, but do not make enough money for Republicans to consider them valuable. People who fight our wars. People who have worked their entire lives, and now live on the SS that they paid for. People who are in college, trying to better themselves.
THESE ARE THE 47%
Those are the FACTS. So you have to ask yourself: Are these people lazy? Are these people victims? Do these people not work hard? Have these people not worked hard?
Are these people the enemy that Republicans claim?
The lines are drawn. The choice is clear. Do you stand with Republicans, insulting and hating these people? Or do you stand for those hard working people, trying to better themselves and our nation? The choice is yours.
warped beliefs? capitalism is what our founding fathers wanted not socialism like your precious obama. it is obama who has the warped beliefs and if you want to live in a socialist state why dont you move to france. by the way i am a democrat who regrets voting for obama last time. not this time though.
WHAT AMERICA NEEDS IS A PRESIDENT THAT GIVES THE TERROISTS IDEAS ON ATTACKING US....
And then, there's this...
If Romney wants to slip suggestions to the terrorists, at least be original, and don't choose something that has already been foiled by someone else's administration...
Actually Ryan it's not inarticulate that's the problem. It's the fact his points are INACCURATE which is. :)
LMAO... who wants to bet that OilShark is one of the 47% and just too stupid to realize it?
NEW YORK TIMES sept 2012
By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE, JULIE CRESWELL and DAVID KOCIENIEWSKI
The New York attorney general is investigating whether some of the nation’s biggest private equity firms have abused a tax strategy in order to slice hundreds of millions of dollars from their tax bills, according to executives with direct knowledge of the inquiry.
Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg News
The Washington office of the Carlyle Group, which has stated in regulatory filings that their partners have not diverted management fees into investments in their funds.
Evan McGlinn for The New York Times
Bain offices in Boston. According to financial statements, Bain partners saved more than $200 million in federal income taxes and more than $20 million in Medicare taxes.
The attorney general, Eric T. Schneiderman, has in recent weeks subpoenaed more than a dozen firms seeking documents that would reveal whether they converted certain management fees collected from their investors into fund investments, which are taxed at a far lower rate than ordinary income.
Among the firms to receive subpoenas are Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Company, TPG Capital, Sun Capital Partners, Apollo Global Management, Silver Lake Partners and Bain Capital, which was founded by Mitt Romney, the Republican nominee for president. Representatives for the firms declined to comment on the inquiry.
Mr. Schneiderman’s investigation will intensify scrutiny of an industry already bruised by the campaign season, as President Obama and the Democrats have sought to depict Mr. Romney through his long career in private equity as a businessman who dismantled companies and laid off workers while amassing a personal fortune estimated at $250 million.
WELL HERE IS ANOTHER SCAM BY THE GREEDY RICH TO EVADE PAYING TAXES. CONVERT YOUR FEES TO CAPITAL GAINS GATEGORY.....Bad enough they get away with capital gains tax, Romney wants to eliminate capital gains tax too! And he dares to rip the people who are not rich like him in video?
Romney show us your taxes like you said you would!
And tells them at the same time that he really doesn't see anything but military solutions in the Middle East.
If he was trying to provoke an attack, how better to do it?
And don't rule out the possibility that he's trying.
After all, it will give him the excuse he needs for $2 trillion in new defense spending, which his part of his plan, but for which we have heard no funding proposals.
But never mind, I'm sure we'll all be happy to see even more money disappear from Social Security.
Dang greedy, slacking seniors.
Redistribution of wealth is a principal of Marxism.
as far as your comment saying it says this in the constitution preamble
The Preamble serves solely as an introduction, and does not assign powers to the federal government, nor does it provide specific limitations on government action. Due to the Preamble's limited nature, no court has ever used it as a decisive factor in case adjudication, except as regards frivolous litigation.
The 16th amendment allows for taxes, but we elect representation to protect us from abusive tax law.
And don't forget the constitution stated purpose is to protect the American people and to limit government in our lives.
So that being said, why is it the governments job to provide social programs? This should be handled at a local level through churches, non-profit groups and charities. They can manage the program much better than government. You as a citizen can choose to donate your time and/or money to a cause you believe in. People can get the help they need and we can all retain our liberty and freedom form an oppressive government.
"Capitalism" does not appear in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. Nor is it supported in the Federalist Papers.
Adam Smith, who wrote "Wealth of Nations" is not considered to be one of our founding fathers. Something about him being Scottish I suppose . . .
What is the future of the American worker? The top 1% take 24% of our nation's annual income. If the top 1% cannot use 24% of all of our country's annual income in purchasing goods and services and investing in the production of goods and services and their distribution and retailing operations, what do they do with the rest?
The problem with our economy is that a portion of our annual income is not being used to purchase goods and services and investing. It is simply sitting there doing nothing.
The 76% of our national income that is shared by the 99% is being used to purchase goods and services and pay down debt. However, it is not enough to spur sales to a level high enough to spur investment by the rich and hiring to a level that substantially reduces the number of unemployed.
What to do?
Republicans say tax cuts for the rich to spur investment and hiring. But, these people are sitting on their money already. How does making this pile of money bigger get them to stop sitting on it waiting for sales to increase? It doesn't.
Obama wants to invest in more infrastructure and education and a jobs program. While this will cost some money, it is an investment that will pay dividends and it is money that is available at a 0% interest rate (current rate on 10 year T-bill). This increase in spending will add to job growth and economic growth (currently 1.9%) spurring our economy to a level where the rich will see their sales go up to a level where they will increase their investing again. It's like priming a pump, once the flow is going, it keeps on going.
The rewards of higher economic growth are lower unemployment, higher tax revenues, lower costs associated with the safety net, and increased values in the housing market, and eventually higher interest rates. It will lower budget deficits. The higher the growth rate, the faster all this happens.
This is macroeconomics (Keynesian) and it really works. Alan Greenspan and Ronald Reagan used it to end 1982-83 recession and speed the recovery. In fact, every recession we have seen since the great depression has been ended and every recovery speeded up by using stimulus spending. It really works.
"Capitalism" has raised more people out of poverty than ANY other political/economic system. It has made America the greatest, strongest and most charitable country in the world, bar none!
Does Romney and Ryan not realise that the majority of the 47% are in 'Red States'? If they aren't careful these people are going to start waking up to who really wants the best for them and who doesn't.
Two observations from an independent reading this thread and others:
1. Feistyredhead must have very little life outside of championing liberal causes on nbcnews. She is too often the first or close to the first poster on these forums.
2. Xabre constantly accuses people of being stupid and needing more education, but if anyone falls under those two categories, it is Xabre.
Personally, I voted for Obama in 2008. I am voting third party this year. Maybe some of you should join me!
There is no such thing as absolute Capitalism, nor should there be. There is no such thing as absolute Socialism, nor should there be.
Capitalism without controls creates dictatorships and monopolies. A capitalistic system is useless if it can't transport goods, services, or materials using those socialist roads,transportation systems, power systems infrastructure, or communications. It supports greed in being the dominating social factor and it denies the concept of "social obligation."
Socialism without some variance creates a society where there is no desire, requirement, or rewards to excel. It leads to stagnation and failure. Socialism is useless if it isn't sustainable and growth oriented simply because resources are depleted and populations grow. Being focused on social obligations it forgets about the individual.
The best system contains elements of both.
We may have to shut down our construction business that we have ran for 12 years. Not because of our failure but because the work picture is so dismal that it is unsustainable. Four years ago we were enjoying record profits. Now we barely get enough work to pay the bills. Last year I made less money than I made when I was in the Navy in 1976, less than 16,000.00. We have gone from employing 25 people to just employing 2. We definitely got change, but its not for the better. We have to take almost all of the profit and overhead out of a job just to land the job. Obama will never have my vote.
First, I just want to point out one more time for the record that Obama through his affordable care act RAISED TAXES on the truly ill by increasing the amount one must pay for medical care before being able to take deductions from 7% to 10%. Only the truly ill ever get to itemize their medical expenses, but now they must pay more before they get to.
Second, what if the cuts to those benefits programs the left loves so well came solely in the form of cuts in fraud, waste, and abuse across the whole of government? What if the cuts came in the form of making government employees' raises based on performance rather than time (have you seen any improvement in the work or skills of the government employees you come in contact with over the past decade--yet they've received several pay raises and you've seen none)? What if the cuts came in the form of upgrading systems so that agencies didn't have eighty offices all over the place, but making it so that a majority of business could be done online streamlining the system where possible (this would work great for Congress as well, and might potentially help to cut back on unfair lobbying practices)? There are so many ways of cutting government expense, yet the left would have you all believe that if they are cutting costs of something, it's coming straight out of your benefits--and it's no wonder they have you believing that. Remember just a while back when they couldn't reach a budget agreement, and the president and his ilk were saying to social security recipients and military members, "If they don't reach an agreement, we won't be issuing checks." THEY are the ones that cut your benefits first!! THEY are the ones that threaten your well-being in order to get their way!!
A quote from a very smart, old dead guy:
"A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circlue of our felicities."
-Thomas Jefferson-
I wonder if most of the 47% in question can even begin to grasp the concepts President Jefferson was talking about?
freethinker????
1. Sounds like you have way to much time on your hands...and throw in an UN healthy bit of jealous/envy.
2. You do the Same thing you accuse Xabre of doing....kind of a flip flop eh? Do as I say Not as I do moment!
If you want to throw away your Vote...go head, its your right.
This completely preposterous. It's nothing more than hit or miss and depends too much on whim. Do you actually propose that special needs children will have their educations adequately funded and managed through a local charity? And why should that be when government will be much more efficient at it than thousands of charities with different goals and funding, not all of which will be truly eleemosynary. Some charities are frauds, even more so than the government.
Which is why we have Social Security in the first place. Alms houses went out of fashion long ago.
So why is the economy a train wreck? Because it didn't work this time, just like it didn't work in the 1920s.
The second post I've seen today that bears repeating on every thread, from now until the election. Maybe if we keep repeating it, people like Worm Meat will begin to figure out why we have the mess we have.
Bravo, sir.
Much as I might like to, because neither candidate is perfect, I'm not in favor of wasting votes. Liberals wasted their votes in 1968 and in 2000, with disastrous results. Just to recap, Al Gore wins Florida outright if Ralph Nader is not on the ballot. No need to worry about hanging chads.
If you're voting for Ron Paul, on the other hand, knock yourself out.
Praysalot,
Congrats on one of the most illogical posts I have read in a while (and that is saying something).
1. Compare the number of my posts to hers, there is no comparison.
What would I be jealous of - an unknown person I never met who posts on the internet? Really, that makes sense to you?
2. Using your logic, people should never change, ever, or else they are flip-flopping. I think Gandhi said it best, "My goal is not to be consistent with my previous statements, my goal is to be consistent with the truth." Apparently you disagree, and that is fine, so please state the merits of remaining the same, forever.
I'm sure Paul Ryan is glad that Mitt Romney was not President of the United States at a time in his life when sadly his millionaire father died and Paul Ryan himself collected social security along with his family until he was 18 yrs old, eventhough his family were millionaires at the time. I guess he would not have had the extra government money for the things his family needed at the time (hard to imagine though since his father was a millionaire and left his family very, very well off), but certainly they were entitled to government benefits and he received them. I wonder how Paul Ryan's mother would have felt for someone to tell her as a widow with children that she was a "free-loader" and "needed to learn how to take care of herself" before they cashed those government checks? Hypocracy is a terrible thing Mr. Ryan...you, yourself and your family benefited from those "government handouts" or did you forget that part of your life once you became a politician?
Good quote Jon.
Let's remember other parts of TJ's First Inaugural Address also (my emphasis in bold):
"During the contest of opinion through which we have passed the animation of discussions and of exertions has sometimes worn an aspect which might impose on strangers unused to think freely and to speak and to write what they think; but this being now decided by the voice of the nation, announced according to the rules of the Constitution, all will, of course, arrange themselves under the will of the law, and unite in common efforts for the common good. All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression."
"I know, indeed, that some honest men fear that a republican government can not be strong, that this Government is not strong enough; but would the honest patriot, in the full tide of successful experiment, abandon a government which has so far kept us free and firm on the theoretic and visionary fear that this Government, the world's best hope, may by possibility want energy to preserve itself?"
"Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none; the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies; the preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad; a jealous care of the right of election by the people"
I suspect that Mr. Jefferson would be ashamed of and furious at the shenanigans going on right now to include: Voter supression, Citizen's United, being dismissive of the "47%", etc.
double post
Red,
Yes i am.
I suppose picking and chosing your topics, on separation of church and state, to whatever you think government should be, is okay with you but it isn't with me.
Can't have it both ways Red Cloud. I know you think you can but you can't.
From the article:
Ryan's above statement is false.
Obama believes in a fair society. Obama wants all Americans to have equal access to economic, political and social opportunities.
Ryan consistently departs from the truth. Romney and Ryan do believe in wealth redistribution. Their unethical actions have jettisoned ill-gained wealth to the very top, the 1%. The GOP's political dogma will continue to send all of this country's resources and wealth to the gilded.
Barely surviving Americans will "always be on the outside, always looking in."
Mitt's 47% statement confirms that the above statement is a bold lie.
Romney and Ryan will allow the "average" citizen to economically and physically perish. Being aware of this fact, many of our citizens will not vote for them. Romney and Ryan must continue to lie to the American people, to scheme their way into the White House.
The GOP's political platform will continue to ruin America.
Vote a Straight Democratic Ticket.
Obama/Biden 2012!
Ms. Molly, you are being too generous. Thank you for the kind comment.
"Ryan: Romney comments 'obviously inarticulate...'"
Finally, at long last, I can agree with something Mr. Ryan says!
Uh-oh... unless agreeing with him means that's the 5th Sign of the Apocalypse.
Anna Molly, i guess I put faith in peoples ability and willingness to step up and help their neighbors. Clearly you care about people in your community. But the government is not the road to manage social programs. Government officials have been known to steel, cheat and lie. corruption will happen where there is money and power. it's up to the people to be dilligent about keeping people honest. Government is so out of reach that there is no way to be sure people are being honest.
As far as sick children or sick anybody, people will step up. I am the parent of child who had special needs as a baby, Easter Seals took us in and provided the help we needed. I would rather give my money to Easter Seals than the government.
Jeez OilShark, I just read the whole litany are writings, you come back with some very clear and concise arguements. Instead of rebutting them, Xabre attacks you on a spelling error?? I guess we shouldn't be surprised, since Obama keeps trying to change the subject on his bad economy, and instead talk about a video, that we find out just today, is missing almost 2 minutes of dialogue, after the website (corn-something) promised to post the whole thing. I guess it's just a Liberal thing to do, changing the subject when you get caught with your pants down. My question to you is, "why are you wasting your time with Xabre??? He clearly only wants to learn what he approves from a liberal standpoint, and he ignores the rest.
gcooper8.....
Don't be too quick to agree with Ryan until you know which of the top 4 definitions of "inarticulate" he referenced.
Romney may (upon his defeat) sink to definition #1. But, that is clearly not the case here.
#2 obviously (and to the GOP's chagrin) isn't apt.
#4 ....would have been nice for the GOP et al...but sorry....that's not it.
So, Ryan must be (by elimination) referring to #3. Yet, Romney DID speak with (unfortunate) CLARITY. Well, he must imply that Romney merely isn't eloquent. So, what does that mean?
Please Mr. Ryan, perhaps YOU are ILLITERATE ("Marked by inferiority to an expected standard of familiarity with language and literature").
Romney said what he meant to say and what he believes. He simply did not want it to go beyond his very private club. Mr. Ryan, whom do you hope to deceive?
Worm meat - I'm glad you got assistance that you needed! Easter Seals does good work. Personally I contribute time and money to Habitat for Humanity (shameless plug there for them!)
What Ms. Molly was saying is a simple truth for several reasons.
First, it doesn't matter if we believe in or support local charities if their resources are not sufficient or available to assist people. And this is simply a reality based on the variety of types and amounts of need.
Second, every type of organziation has had thieves in it, to include charities, PNPs, NGOs, and businesses. As you said (partial quote), "corruption will happen where there is money and power."
Lastly, NO other organization has the ability to deliver the amount of resources required in as fast a time frame for people in need than government. Remember that it is the governments j-o-b to provide for the health, safety, and welfare of the American people.
I respect that you support Easter Seals. Thank you for caring about others.
Ryan is a lying little prick who seems to think that his taking government support after his wealthy, well-insured father died doesn't count as mooching off the taxpayers. Vote for the R&R boys, and you'll deserve the eviscerating you deserve, you whining, ignorant red-necked gun-huggers!
Citizen Romney could save time and effort by simply having Mr. Ryan perched on his knee ventriloquist style, explaining Romney's remarks in real time rather than a day later.
All the redistribution of wealth is doing is making you rely on the gov't more and letting them control you more. You are their bitch. I don't like being someones bitch.
Matthew, The words to describe your comments adequetely escape me! Ignorant, foolish, childish just don't say quite enough. You're starting to sound like Feisty (aka Chris Matthews) and Backhouse more every day! By the way, xabre, since you know everything... Does Backhouse have a quarter moon on the door?
How are all these gov't programs helping the economy, it takes away the incentive to work. That was Romney's point. Are some of you too dense to understand?
Jason-1425018.....you said:
Neither do we......Now, considering the "redistribution of wealth" has been ongoing for the past 30 odd years ( FROM THE MIDDLE CLASS TO THE WEALTHY CLASS )....well, we are not going to take it anymore.
Don't believe it? Just take a look at the statistics on "concentration of wealth in the U.S.".
It is past time for a RE-redistribution. We can start with a middle class tax cut and a broad re-engineering of our tax codes that makes sure Romney and his ilk pay AT LEAST the same proportion of WHATEVER income they enjoy as do we. We should also require his crowd to pay FICA on ALL income. This could go on.....and, it will.
Buy American ! Buy Local ! Support America’s middle class ! Support Women’s rights ! Support Civil Rights ! Protect God’s Green Earth ! Vote Democrat ! Obama/Biden 2012 !
Ian, if you're really not going to take it anymore, then demand that your government make doing business in America friendlier so that people are comfortable investing in new American business. Trickle down economics works, as proof I offer that NO JOB was EVER created by someone who had no idea, no time and no money to invest. In fact, every job, including every government job, was created by those who had the money to invest. A couple of problems we face right now are 1. that investing in new jobs in the US isn't pragmatic because nothing is stable, and only the government can help there, and 2. that the government keeps hitting the print button hoping to stimulate the economy and DEVALUING EVERY DOLLAR, the dollars of the rich and the poor alike. If you really, truly, aren't going to take any more, then demand your government change it's abusive practices that make doing business in the US utterly unfeasible and drive the value of the dollar down.
Ian, I'm all for changing the tax code, but not for all the gov't assistance programs. There is a HUGE difference. When you get on all those programs they own you. You get to the point where you can't find a job that would pay enough to get off them and have the same lifestyle because you have no skills or experience. Then you vote for whoever is going to keep those benefits no matter where they are taking the country. That is the problem with Obama. We all know there are people in need, but we need to give them opportunities to better themselves, not just access to gov't money.
I love these guys. Myth Romney and Lyin' Ryan, this is like they are at the gangway of the Titanic fighting to get aboard. Both are Calhoun republicans, I got mine, f**k you. $50,000 a plate dinners, that's way more than I ever spent, even taking the whole family, and after workin' all week. But like his wife said, Myth is a common man just everybody else, only with slightly more expensive gold flatware!!
And on foreign affairs, Obama has always had the notion that if we were nice to countries that they would like us. You can tell by looking at the current situation in the middle east that it's not about how nice you are to other countries. It's all about controling natural resources. The countries in the middle east don't like us, but they like our money. I would be all for getting out of the middle east all together, but they you would open it up to Russia and China. I think Obama has good intentions with what his goals are and what he has tried to accomplish, but the reality of achieving those goals isn't what you think they would be because of the unintended consequenses (or maybe intended, who knows). Know what I mean? That's why Obama has got to go. His policies are just bad for the country.
It would be nice if what Romney said was even close to what Ryan said, but it's not.
No, that wasn't what Romney was trying to say. He said exactly what he was trying to say... and was very articulate about it. Does Ryan even know what inarticulate means?
What Romney MEANT by what he said was that he normally eats tacos but decided on meatloaf that day... LOL.
OldDog47, if you disagree with what I said, then feel free present your perspective and back it up with facts. Nothing you said in your post addressed to me discussed the facts of the topic at hand, nor did it substantiate your respective position.
Have a good day.
Dateline Today and Tomorrow: Lyin' Ryan, proven liar, so immoral that some of the bishops of his own church have spoken out against him, and member the party that initiated and presided over the greatest redistribution of wealth in American history, has today told more lies.
That pretty much sums it up.
Good Gwad! Distribution, redistribution, distribution etc., of wealth is the basic stalwart of a healthy consumer based capitalistic economy and society. We better have some redistribution soon, or we are all shot to hell. Are there people who actually think once money is spent, it disappears forever, or, is digested by a seller whom you paid for a product? Gwaddamn!, this is the USA! The bastion of capitalism! I understand the "lack of understanding" of the ignorant and lesser minded, but surely these are the exceptions within the measured numbers of a higher average. This is a strawman accusation. Our currency, which is a symbolic exchange medium of the wealth of this nation is out of balance. Too few are holding too much of it, and too many have too little of it, therefore, too few hold too much of the wealth, and too many hold too little of the wealth. It's a real simple proposition of basic arithmetic, or, if one prefers, go with the rule of "Occam's razor". Basics won't change.
Inarticulate?????He graduated at the top of his class from one of the most prestigous law schools in the United States. He was supported by his family while he attended this school. He did not work but devoted himself to being articulate. He said exactly what he meant to say and he meant what he said. The only problem is he was recorded by one of his friends---soul mates. He was not inarticulate---he was caught. Lyin Ryan doing his job.
No, it was not inarticulate. It was simply factually wrong on multiple counts. Didn't this guy have to study intro to statistics to get his business degree? He conflated sets that have nothing to do with one another to come up with something that was completely off the wall. The factual problems have been thoroughly dissected by others. I think there are a couple of pieces to his lunacy. One is obviously pandering--to the tea party (which had been promoting the spin he uttered) and to the Thurston Howells he saw as his audience that day. The other part is a component of his world view and is precisely why he would have no problem as a Bain capitalist jettisoning business baggage (e.g. workers) who were so much bilge in the boat from the Bain capitalist point of view. Geez, even George H.W. had some sense of oblige as part of his noblesse. Not so Mr. Romney. As the compaign churns on, this candidate has become crankcase sludge that is slowly dispersing in the waters as it makes its way to the drain.
Laughable that the adjective Mitt chose to describe his deficiency was lack of "elegance". But is it not amazing how the entitled second generation--you know, the kids who got the trust funds (first George W. and then W. Mitt) completely discarded what their elders did have for principles? George H.W. supporting--really--housing desegregation and Planned Parenthood. George Romney--really--finding himself one of the Establishment that had been snookered by Vietnam and segregationists?
Good grief! This morons who watch Faux News really need to get brain transplants (or perhaps brain IMplants). When I pay taxes that then go toward building a bridge in some state that I do not live in and will never visit, my wealth is being "redistributed." BFD!
b4america:
so you were making record profits 4 years ago, and last year you made almost nothing. Think that might have something to do with the fact that the economy collapsed in the worst crisis since the Great Depression? Think your construction business failings might have something to do with the complete collapse of the housing market? What exactly do you think Obama should have done to 'fix' that? Should he have redistributed some wealth your way?
Since you made so little last year, I'm guessing you didn't pay federal income taxes. According to Romney, that makes you irresponsible, a victim, and dependent on government. So you're gonna trot right over to the polls and vote for him.
I don't understand republicans. I really don't.
lu-1328381-6558772.......you said:
Trickle-down economics does NOT work. Furthermore, it is unwise "voodoo" economics.
In a fair economy, those with good ideas (regardless of their personal wealth), can obtain funding to realize those ideas. Your assertion that only wealthy people can be trusted to create jobs is both insulting and wrong. Actually, (truly) small business creates most jobs in America.
This country should, instead, pursue policies to promote a percolate-up (perk-up) economy.
First, taxes on middle income people should be lowered. Any revenue shortfall should be offset by raising taxes (actually paid) on wealthy shirkers such as Mitt Romney. Secondly, Romney and his kind should pay FICA on all of their income regardless of source. Thirdly, we should post a bounty so that potential whistle-blowers will be motivated to bring information to the IRS which leads to tax-evasion convictions. Fourth, our tax code should be substantially modified to discourage the accumulation and concentration of wealth by a wealthy few. Such concentration is, obviously (i.e. Citizens United ruling), injurious to the health of our democracy.
These steps are only a good start. We have a long way to go toward bringing fairness to our economic and political systems. We know you folks will fight us all the way. The struggle will be long and difficult. But, we know that we will eventually prevail because, in the long road of history, despite occasional setbacks, freedom and equality is not long denied.
So Romney is unable to articulate his thoughts and needs to have someone else interpret his remarks? How on earth will he be able to communicate with the leaders of other nations? Will Ryan or someone else always be there with him to hold his hand? That Romney cannot think or speak for himself without insulting people? This should be a clear indication that Romney is not ready to assume leadership of this country!
"We have met the enemy and he is us!" Pogo by Walt Kelly
I don't think Romney has a monopoly on requiring others to interpret their remarks. Methinks this is a case of the pot and kettle.
Yes. And the point that Romney infers that deployed military must be government leeches isn't totally off the mark whatsoever. There is no "lost in interpretation". Romney just displayed complete and utter ignorance.
So unlike the first poster on this thread you are claiming Romney was perfectly articulate?
Perfectly articulate in his idiocy, yes.
OK.....Mr. Marvelous why are you fighting so hard for either one of two government jobs?
Hypocrit!
Obama can't even speak without teleprompter.
Let's see...he went to London and insulted the Brits.....inarticulation, Romney's foreign policy.
When I first saw the "47%" tape I immediately thought Romney had borrowed from Santorum's playbook. If you listen closely Romney's remarks smack of racism. Disgraceful.
Re-elect President Obama!!
exactly! Cheney has had to clean up so many of Romney's mouth diarrhea messes so far. Foreign diplomacy is crucial and I would not trust Romney anywhere near any foreign ambassadors. His mouth would open and all he would do is insult them.
He plans on using Ann's ever so wicked finger to make his point.
redvirginia,
I watched the Republican convention for three days. Painful doesn't even come close to describing it. Every speaker there, with the exception of Clint, used a teleprompter. Some better than others but they all used it. So what, besides the one you should cover with a hat, is your point?
WIll somebody please hold this persons hand? They obviously need someone to point out what they just said. IT MAKES NO SENSE?
"Inarticulate, but"... what a left-handed compliment from a far right numbskull that is Ryan.
Obama 2012
This election reminds me of Dumb and Dumber...or maybe, Evil and Eviler??? Both canidates are BIG MONEY and money is the root of all evil...My hope is that we don't keep losing our FREEDOMS whoever gets elected!!! This is the dirtest election!!!
@Don't Carry It All - my President doesn't understand ME, a small business owner. He flat out said that small business owners are wrong when they "think they worked harder, or are smarter", and that we didn't build our businesses. So what if I had teachers, roads to drive on, the internet. Who paid for all that? I paid for my tuition, I got the job that paid for the car I drove on the road, and I pay for the bloody internet and the computer than runs in my business. No government fairy waved a magic wand and made allthat materialize. I worked for it. My money, my blood, and my literal sweat and tears. I would like to meet the teacher who spent my savings and made the sacrifices I made, and came up with my idea to start my business. Obama has never run a business. He may have had a teacher hand him everything, but I had to study for my diploma. I voted for him in '08, and I won't make that mistake this year.
Redvirginia... is that really the best you can come up with? Just say it, you can't stand him because he is a black man. You'll feel better, really racist
P Roberson- You're full of crap! We don't like him because he is incompetent and ignorant, like you.
AnnMolly said, "Just to recap, Al Gore wins Florida outright if Ralph Nader is not on the ballot. No need to worry about hanging chads"
Ann, you cleverly ignore the worst "win" ever disturbed by a third party, when Bill Clinton beat out George Bush thanks to the wonderful addition of Ross perot to the Ballot! I think we're even!!!
I'm glad to see that neither Romney, nor Ryan is backing off of, or away from his comments. I believe in helping people get back on their feet, just as mush as the next guy does.
But, Romney was absolutely correct when he said that a certain percentage of the population would never vote for him, because they believe they will get "free stuff" from Obama.
...and why shouldn't they think that? He bailed out the banks, he bailed out GM. Why shouldn't/wouldn't 47% of the public think that he'd bail them out too?!
The other problem here is that people who pay little or no taxes at all, are screaming and whining over the fact that Romney pays "only" a few million dollars in taxes each year.
Isn't that somewhat hypocritical? To be paying nothing, and complaining about someone who pays millions of dollars annually?
Like I said, I believe in helping people out, until they can get back on their feet.
But, I don't like the idea of having to share everything I've worked for over the course of 40 years with people who do little or nothing to help themselves.
Remember, The Democratic Party was ALWAYS The Party of THE WORKING MAN!
Not, the party of those who freeload, and complain about the success of others.
DEMOCRATS FOR ROMNEY 2012!
I have seen many of the posters above think Fiestredhead is "crazy" because she is the first to make a comment. Has anyone thought about the time of day might make the difference? She either is getting off work or just starting the day. There is far too many comments that criticise people opinions. That is what the forum is for, to voice your OWN opinion. Mine is that the GOP is for crippling the US citizens into their thoughts and religion by suppressing voters with voter ID laws, bargaining rights for unions, signing a contract with Grover which led to the downgrade of US credit rating, suppressing public education with vouchers and they generally are the owners of corporations who have sent Americans jobs overseas! They are becoming dictators! Please listen to them during campaigning, they are puppets for the elite who already have started the USA towards dictatorship.
Zman, it sounds like you are starting to taste the cool aid. There are not 47% of our nation mooching on the other 53%. This is not a fact, it is a ploy, a lie, that Myth uses to make the people who attend $50,000 a plate dinners feel good about themselves and their own greed. Americans are a hard working people and given a level playing field they will succeed and prosper, but the playing field is not level, it is tilted toward the 1%. That's the main choice of this election, too have a more level field for everybody or a more tilted one toward the rich and powerful, so they can become even more rich, with even more power.
Never in my lifetime have I witnessed a vice-presidential candidate refer to his presidential candidate as "inarticulate".
If Ryan has such a horrible opinion of Miss Mittsy, why shouldn't we?
What is Amazing is the select few
number of Naive Americans who have beenConned/Fooled by the
republicanCrimeCartelPropagandaMachine. Think about it...
These Very Well monied, SnakeOil Saleman, MittTaxPittanceRommel and
his SideKick, Eddie Munster, are The Elitist Thug's economic Hitters Who
Caused This Whole Disaster Starting with President Reagan and Most Assuredly
Pronounced with KingGeorge The VacuumBrained during his NOTORIOUSLY SHAMEFUL Shrubber Reign
2001- 2008. These two Amoral Politaphiles are into Contolling
and Manipulating America in their favor, ACTUALLY Stealing America's economic power.
Research It: These Republican 1-10% wealthy and corporate
Thieves have OVER $40 Trillion Dollars, OUR MONEY, Stashed in Overseas accounts in their
names and registration numbered foreign accounts. Money needed for rebuilding America NOT Bloating their elitist "family wealth" for the future of their "Little Darlings" SUCH AS Rommels $48,000,000 Malibu Mansion WITH an InHouse Car Elevator for his son's $180,000 Ferrari.
Prez O is the ONLY Choice. These Elitist rich Thugs calling themselves "republicans" belong in Prison NOTin
Congress or The WhitHouse. Try this one on for size: President Harry Truman in 1948: "The Republicans … will try to make people believe that everything the Government has done for the country is socialism. They will go to the people
and say: "Did you see that social security check you received the other day—you
thought that was good for you, didn't you? That's just too bad! That's nothing in the world but socialism. Did you see that new flood control dam the Government is building over there for the protection of your property? Sorry—that's awful socialism! That new hospital that they are building is
socialism. Price supports, more socialism for the farmers! Minimum wage laws?
Socialism for labor! Socialism is bad for you, my friend. Everybody knows that.
And here you are, with your new car, and your home, and better opportunities
for the kids, and a television set—you are just surrounded by socialism! Now the
Republicans say, 'That's a terrible thing, my friend, and the
only way out
of this sinkhole of socialism is to vote for the Republican ticket.'" And, AND!,
AND!!! that was 64 Years Ago!!!. The republicanCrimeCartel is still doing the
same exploitation
of people THEY ARE NOTORIUS FOR. BUT, according
toKingGeorgeTheVacuumBrained, it is called "free market" capitalism; with
families in the streets and 25% Unemployment and worse with
MittTaxPittanceRommel and his buddy EddiMunster.
Fellow and Sister Americans: A vote for ANY republicanCrimeCartelSoldier, Rommel, is a vote Against Yours and Your Family's Well Being. You Can Take That Advice To The Bank.
"Obviously inarticulate."
Really? Sounds like he meant it to me!
So which lie is it? I meant what I said before I got caught or I didn't mean it now that it's out?
T. Money Trim 'n' Rapy Luau...curing dependency 1 billionaire at a time.
Rombot.Has.Nothing. (Though if he'd been born Mexican, he have it locked up.)
When Paul "Fuzzy Math" Ryan has to cover for him you know very clearly why so many Republicans now up for office are presently, as quickly as possible, distancing themselves from Romney.
If Romney keeps talking he'll lose the house and senate for the Republicans too.
Maybe then there will be a chance to stop the Oligarchy.
There HAS been a redistribution of the wealth: it has ALL gone to the upper 1% in the last 20 odd years.
And there are those of limited means who STILL trust these criminals? This worship of authoritarian figures is SO dangerous. That's how Hitlers get in power and prosperous middle classes have their wealth redistributed into the hands of a select few.
Maybe the distribution " of wealth " has gone to the upper 1% because they have worked hard for it. The democRATS hate it when people have more than they do. They don't want to have to work for it. They want it handed to them while they sit home doing nothing. Your last paragraph makes no sense. The only Hitler in this campaign is Obama. He wants to be able to tell each one of us when to get up, where to go to work and how much the government will allow us to take home. He is the most arrogant, the biggest hypercrite, liar, self rightous, person to ever slither across the ground into the White House. He can't even produce an honest birth certificate. He doesn't want anyone to see his college records because he used another ID and got financial aid using this false ID. Everyone should watch the movie Obama - 2016. This man is out to destroy this country. He couldn't do it in 4 years so he will keep trying unless we stop him. He doesn't respect anyone. He has embarrassed us in every country he has visited.
Karen
I feel so sorry for you dear. You must have a horridly shallow life. (no true friends, loving family, and a Chip on your shoulder as big as Texas) Spewing Lie's, enough times, Still does not make them true. Hate (like you carry) is all consuming. As far as "Respect" you obviously get none and surely don't give any. Please dear, don't have children until you can see life with-out your hat filled pathetic eyes. Seek help.Good luck to you.
ForePlinger, perhaps you might wish to look up the meaning of the word inarticulate before you comment further!
Glad to see the Obama campaign and its media arm First Read spiking the football at the 10 yard line...they were running toward the goal line, but started to do a Deon Sanders dance, then looked up and admired themselves on the big screen...couldnt help themselves..
Whoops...Fumble !
Yes, and the point still stands that Romney was wrong. 47% is made up mostly of the elderly, working poor, and deployed military.
But even according to Ryan they must be:
Yes. Deployed military are government leeches. You heard it here folks.
What a bunch of idiots: Romney, Ryan, and anyone who supports them.
The fumble is Romney and Ryan arguing that military families serving in foreign countries and paying no taxes are freeloaders.
Romney and Ryan now target seniors who barely get by on Social Security and Medicare because they pay no taxes. They worked all their life paying into Social Security and Medicare and deserve the government Social Security and Medicare they receive.
Romney and Ryan saying Americans who attended public schools or are sending their children to public schools are freeloaders and should pay their own way instead of relying on the government.
Makes me very sad that Romney and Ryan hate government for protecting our freedom, keeping our seniors who built this country alive, and believing that it's not America's responsibility to educate our children.
Bob In Virginia-5210392: Oooo that comment of your sounds like not only "sour grapes", but wishful thinking. The only ones fumbling the football, Sweetie, are the conservatives who thought they had a winning strategy based on a lie perpetrated by Erick Erickson, Drudge Report and the conservative blogosphere about 47% not paying taxes. AND, as it turns out, and has repeatedly been pointed out, most of those in that percentage who pay NO income taxes are bigoted, old white men on social security - most of Republican Romney's base.
Xabre,
You forgot the 1,500 millionaires who also don't pay federal taxes.
First Read is Obama's media arm?? Are you freakin' serious?? Have you seen how many Fox News so-called 'analysts' are also direct advisors to the Robme campaign?!?!? It must be wonderful as a "campaign advisor" to sell your spin directly to the camera as a "Fix News contributor"... how can they even have the word 'News' in their name?!?!? Someone grab me my Elephant Shovel, my boots only go up to my waist and it's piling high and getting thick up in here! The rain falling on the Republican campaign comes from the tears of Lincoln's spirit...
Debbie,
The fumble is Romney and Ryan arguing that military families serving in foreign countries and paying no taxes are freeloaders.
Was that on Romney video? Are you using the video as your source, and if so, where did he say that?
Deployed military make up part of the "47%" that Romney was talking about on that video. Deployed military are exempt from paying income tax on combat pay.
federal taxes? Like gas taxes, cigarettes, and many many others? Do you mean income tax?
but i bet those 1,500 pay more property tax per person in 1 yr than most of you pay in your entire lifetime
OilShark, property tax goes to local government, not the federal government; so they would not be contributing to the country as a whole...believe it or not, a lot of the 47% own homes too and contribute on the local level--if it's good for the 1%; it's good for the 47%.
Thetotas - have you seen the video yet? Nobody should have to transcribe the video for you because you're too lazy to push play yourself. He did say that. He was talking about 47% of the population only voting for obama because he gives them handouts and they are freeloading. That 47% is comprised of seniors, children, military personnel, families who make less than 20k a year, etc. Do your homework before you defend somebody.
Yo Bob - let's discuss the double-dribble from camp Romney?
thats pretty weird, im active duty military stationed overseas for 12 years. im pretty sure i pay federal income tax and state tax. while im deployed my pay is tax free, except for my state tax.
Typical liberal
deflectionresponse. Talking football and you want to change to basketball to better fit your agenda.What he said was true. In the unedited version, these were two separate points. The 47% that don't pay taxes are not interested in tax cuts. Period. I see a lot of people blaming GWB for the economy, and don't they feel they are due or entitled to that which they lost?
What bothers me is that nobody is asking how a Mother Jones writer planted a hidden camera in a private home? Was this legal? This sounds worse than Watergate!
Rodger...396420
.It was Not a Mother Jones writer that took the Footage. Please try to keep up. It was an Invited guest to the $50K fund raiser who was filming for himself. He was so shocked that Mitt would disc 47% of the US people, he decided to go public. But until James Carter checked into it and brokered a deal (NO cash involved) to get it to Mother Jones, it was all but buried on the Internet.
Please, Please do your homework..turn Off Fox and pay attention. Taking rumors as facts is what my old party (GOP) wants you to do. Fools will always blindly follow.
Peggy The Frustrated,
You're buying into a load of BS from the left. No one on the right wants to tax SS! If you're 63 and living on SS then you know as well as I do it's not taxed! I don't mind paying taxes on my income from other sources, nor should anyone else. There are a lot of people out there that could and should pay something, but don't. How can you have a club where half the members don't pay dues?
Peggy -
Do you even have a point to your rant?
The lack of sentence/paragraph structure make it virtually unreadable.
I get that you are unhappy and feel that the 'wealthy' should support you, but why can't you support yourself?
Romney/Ryan, the first politicians in history to argue that military families serving in foreign countries and protecting our freedom are freeloaders if they pay no taxes.
They never said that, matter of fact the democrats are the ones always trying to not give military a raise. Obama wants to STEAL from some to give to others.....first pres to ever try that
OilShark1, you actually believe this??
"matter of fact the democrats are the ones always trying to not give military a raise"
Get informed, please!
Which party really cares about our Veterans and how are they showing their support?
The GOP is No Friend to Military Members Struggling During Recession
George Zornick on May 29, 2011 - 9:33 PM ET
House speaker John Boehner spent his Memorial Day weekend at a funeral for an Ohio solider killed in Afghanistan, solemnly attending the services and weeping at the end, during the playing of taps.
Boehner’s respect for the military sacrifice is admirable. Unfortunately, his apparent feelings are not borne out by his voting record. In recent years, Boehner’s Republican caucus in the House of Representatives has taken several votes this year that are substantive insults to veterans and active duty members of the military. The GOP has long enjoyed voters’ trust as the political party most likely to defend the armed services—but the facts tell a different story.
Most of the recent measures taken in Washington to help veterans aim to protect them from the economic crisis. Unemployment and foreclosure no doubt touch many Americans. But many veterans spent much of the past decade fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan, only to re-enter civilian life as the economy bottomed out. They faced an even steeper uphill battle than most, often struggling with injury, mental stress, or at the very least, many years out of the country and away from the job market.
Accordingly, lawmakers offered a wide range of bills to assist recent veterans—and Republicans opposed nearly all of them.
Foreclosure in particular has been a problem. Over the past two years, unscrupulous lenders have been improperly foreclosing on military members’ property, often while a solider was serving in Iraq or Afghanistan. Other times, soldiers would be foreclosed upon while recovering from a serious injury or post-traumatic stress disorder.
The foreclosure rate in military towns is four times higher than the national average, and the rate of foreclosure within ten miles of a military facility rose 217 percent between 2007 and 2009. Near the Marine Corps Base in Quantico, the foreclosure rate jumped 414 percent.
The House member who represents that district, Representative Gerry Connolly (D-VA), saw what should have been clear to all policymakers—while many Americans were in need of help from the federal government in fighting off foreclosure, military members were particularly stressed. He offered a measure that would offer emergency mortgage relief formembers of the armed services. Republicans killed the bill on a party-line vote.
In February, Republicans passed a budget bill that slashed $75 million that would have funded housing vouchers for homeless veterans. Republicans claim that the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which runs the program, has unused vouchers and so the cuts were fiscally responsible. There’s some truth to the unused vouchers claim; just over 2,400 went unassigned. That’s a bipartisan failure in a country where 136,000 go homeless at some point during every year, but Republican cuts are hardly a solution.
Even before they were in the majority, Republicans often voted against seemingly simple measures to help out members of the armed services over-stressed by nearly a decade of war.
In June 2009, a vast majority of Republicans voted against providing extra money to active duty members of the military subject to “stop-loss” orders—those who had their enlistments involuntarily extended. The bill called for such members to get an extra $500 for every month they were under a stop-loss order, but Republicans opposed it.
Republicans also initially opposed a new GI bill to provide a four-year college education to those who fought in Iraq or Afghanistan. They eventually relented, but still opposed extending the benefit to the children of soldiers who had been killed in those conflicts.
Read more here:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/161028/gop-no-friend-military-members-struggling-during-recession#
Please, i dont have time to dig up articles on dems cutting pay under clinton, and dems always wanting to cut def budget that affects current and retired military. Do you even understand the article and what its talking about?
i'd say 43 did a good job of stealing from the taxpayer and giving to the bankers... but he wasn't the first president to do so, just like Obama isn't the 'first pres to ever try that'.
The bankers made off bc of the fair housing act of 96 under clinton, it was windfall profits and actually bush tried to stop it in 02 only to hear crys of racisim and fairness shut it down.
Debbie, No wonder Romney didn't bother to thank them in his convention speech; he really does have no respect for them.
Chicago MOBpolitics...you can not run on you sorry record..belittle the other guy with lies and innuendos!!
Our fearless leader, the chosen one, the messiah --only has the Barney Fife type of security(except for himself)....Americans can only shoot beanbags.. not even a bullet in the pocket...ask the parents of dead HERO -Agent Brain Terry!!
If armed Marines had of been the security, the headlines would be...Americans kill, rape and mutilate defenseless children and women...Ask Jon Kerry ( UNFIT FOR COMMAND) about his lies to Congress in 1971!!!!. Anti-Americans show up in many forms...ETERNAL VIGILANCE is required and all due caution expected to be afforded by our leaders!!!! THAT is too much to ask of the Chicago MOB!!!
What does fairness in lending have to do with windfall profits? Nada, zilch. Read up oily - the reason there was any profit to be made is because bankers were forced to loan in blighted neighborhoods, which helped make property values rise. Your revisionist history is an epic fail.
Biggest raise I ever received was under Jimmy Carter he took care of the troops now Reagan bought equipment but small pay raises.
USMC
OilShark1
Please, i dont have time to dig up articles on dems cutting pay under clinton, and dems always wanting to cut def budget that affects current and retired military.
----
What, you mean a president who wanted to reduce spending on a military that wasn't being used because we weren't in an extended drawn out ground conflict? Oh the humanity!
Debbie - if you care about truth, it is the media that is calling people "moochers" and "freeloaders", not Romney. He was identifying people who were not going to vote for him. Romney said is that his message about tax cuts didn't resonate with people who don't pay taxes. That is probably true. If you don't pay taxes, then why would you care about tax cuts? There are also people with an entitlement mentality. He figures that they won't vote for him, and that is probably true also. He really didn't make any value judgement other than the fact that he wasn't going to win their vote.
Rodger..
Again you refuse to do Any fact checking on your Own. Tisk...did you sleep through school or just cheat..or did they kick you out. You proud Teabaggers are in for a big surprise come Nov. Open your Ears, shut your Mouth and study something besides Rush, Fox or any other of the 1% that you think gives a rats ass about you or you "Kind". Get it? Probably not. Sad. And that folks is why the GOP wants to dumb down More of our youth.
Debbie-525743,
You are the most ill-informed, ignorant commenter here today! You have yet to get even one tiny fact correct. Do yourself a favor and quit while you're behind!
Cynthia's Point,
Really, you cite "The Nation" as a source? You couldn't find a more biased left wing rag if you tried! Maybe we should check out Iranian TV as a source too. Too many loons here today, I'm starting to miss Feisty!
OilShark1 wrote "The bankers made off bc of the fair housing act of 96 under clinton, it was windfall profits and actually bush tried to stop it in 02 only to hear crys of racisim and fairness shut it down."
OS, I thought you were merely a moonie. But, since I was in the mortgage business and actually understand what happened, the comment above told me that you are much less than that: you're a liar.
For those who favor light over heat, here's the guy who came up with the number explaining what it means...
GWEN IFILL: For more on the numbers and the politics, I'm joined by Roberton Williams, an economist and senior fellow at the Tax Policy [Center].
His 2009 tax study was the source of the 47 percent number. A 2011 follow-up showed a slight downtick to 46 percent.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec12/romney_09-18.html
Dangerfield. The irony comes from examination of the people that actually make up those numbers.
Okay, let's try satire...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/09/19/jon_stewart_rips_romneys_dependent_comment.html
Gwen Ifill or Monty Burns...either way...
I had to be on unemployment benefits for six months, and I hated every single day of it, but it kept my kids fed and barely that. The only way I feel victimized is by the elite pushing legislation that skews the playing field further and further to their benefit at the expense and on the backs of the middle class and the poor. Is it a coincidence that in recorded history worker's wages are at an all time low while simultaneously corporation profits are at an all time high?? G.E. makes 16 Billion in profit and pays not one dime in taxes due to subsidies? And that's just ONE example... We need to end B.S. subsidies to Corporate Mafias like Big Oil, reduce our military footprint, reset the tax codes, and start focusing on legislation that protects our PEOPLE and not these global corporations who get their start in the rich soil of the American way of life, make enough money to go global, then siphon every dime they can overseas and out of the society that allowed them to flourish in the first place... the unmitigated gall of these parasites is sickening!
Well said!
Steve - I have been fortunate enough to keep my job during the downturn, and knock on wood, I hope it stays that way. I'm thrilled that I, via the government, could offer a small assist to help you through your rough times. Romney's claim that access to food is an entitlement is disgusting. You and your family deserve to be fed, regardless of your employment situation.
Red! Its not that anyone wants people out of work and they DO deserve the assistance! Come on man! You know as well as anyone else there is a huge segment of society that don't work nor do they have any interest in employment but they have figured out that the system they have learned to manipulate for decades..keeps paying!!!!!!! The gov pays the losers and then we pay the gov!!!
They get FREE FOOD all the time because they don't stop having baby's with multiple men..hand them off for foster care...LINK cards-FREE school which they receive assistance (if they take advantage) in the form of checks they can spend anyway they would like then...they default on their loans! Simple system! They actually have a Gov program in Chicago they call the "dumb check"! People line up and take a simple test each month and if they fail...they receive a check!!!! This my friend is the abuse!!!
Now our beloved president want to redistribute the wealth???? WTF?
chris-2051162
How dare you talk about stay-at-home mom Ann Romney that way!
@Chris - your attempt to paint a portrait of a welfare queen is pathetic - all you have done is paint a picture of a pious prick. Welfare queens likely comprise .00005% of the population, while pious pricks seem to comprise 20% of the population - which you,Ryan, and Romney belong.
What I hear from the right is that since there is a chance that someone might take advantage of a program that they should not be on is a good reason to scrap the whole thing. Romney/Ryan quote 47% but fail to discuss who makes up that number. When broken down there are very few of what I would call dead beats taking advantage of a program designed to help those down on their luck.
robmehood and lyin......doublin down on stupid!
Owebama and Bidet, doulblin down on debt.
Vote for congressional representatives that will work for the interests of Americans NOT JUST the interest of having a Republican in the White House. Obstructionism at the cost of American citizens is treason.
wheres the article on this site about the Pres. and his wacky radical ideas of stealing from some to give to others? You guys can spin romneys remarks all you want but its the truth. People who depend on govt and expect them to pay their way while they sit around and do nothing will never vote repub. Your guy is a radical and it shows more and more every day
You mean like my friend with MS? She's in Romney's "don't matter" group. Yup, she's just a lazy mooch.
WHere is her family? there are foundations that help..and the fact is some people do need help no one disputes that..but there is more fraud than actuall people who need asst. taking a minority of the cases to prove your overall point is just plain silly. Just because there are people who are sick doesnt give you the right to STEAL from others to pay for it.
Yes, there is more Medicare fraud than useful spending. There is more SSI fraud than actual useful spending...
That pretty much settles it. You're a dumbass.
Maybe she was an only child, never married and her parents are both deceased? I don't know the answer, but the danger of painting with the broad brush as you have just done is that it assumes that you know everyone's path. It is never wise to make that assumption.
Xabre - for your reading pleasure.
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/redistribution_of_wealth.html
"If a man proposes to redistribute wealth, he means explicitly and necessarily that the wealth is his to distribute. If he proposes it in the name of the government, then the wealth belongs to the government; if in the name of society, then it belongs to society. No one, to my knowledge, did or could define a difference between that proposal and the basic principle of communism."
Facts are stubborn xabre sorry you cant dispute the truth. And danoid, again there are legit people that need asssistance and help. We have a friend who has a son w/ cerbral paulsy, almost all of their assit with bills and nursing comes from donations and charities..not the govt. More people abuse the system.
Yeah it makes much more sense for the middle class to pay a higher percentage rate so the wealthy can have more. (That kind of redistribution is OK) It makes much more sense to get rid of Social Security and make those elderly get back into the work force. And those disabled people MUST have wealthy family members who can take care of them...dang freeloaders.
Soc sec has always been borowed from and if you had any idea of what it actually was you would know that when it was created the age you recieve it was longer than the avg life span. if you are depending on ss to retire with no other source of income you are in trouble and made bad descisions along lifes way. The rich spend more on the economy and create a cash flow. If something isnt done to curtail this radical thinking there is going to be no money for anyone in soc sec bc libs continiously borrow from it
how do the rich get your tax? why are you not an advocate for our govt lowering its budget and saving money before we start trying to ask others to pay more?
I am saddened to read about your son. If you can meet all of your needs without the government then you are to be commended. I would merely ask the following...
1. Does everyone know where to turn to as an alternative to government assistance...and if not what do we do to bridge the gap?
2. What happens when (hopefully not for a long, long time) you are no longer around?
Oilshark...where's her family? I'll bet you they're doing everything they can; but, if you're living paycheck to paycheck, you've got a couple kids, a mortgage and your hours have been cut, you may not be able to help financially. Are there foundations out there to help, sure....but not to take care of her long term needs. That is what govenment safety nets are for. Ann Romney, and I honestly hope she stays in good health and has no relapse of her MS; but she takes medicine that costs thousands of dollars a month (this comes directly for her in an interview), this medication is not covered by most insurance companies. The Romneys can afford to pay for it....shouldn't it be available to all? Shouldn't government make sure that insurance companies pay for this so that maybe this lady wouldn't have to be dependent? Be honest, if this was your mother or sister....wouldn't you need the safety net?
"And danoid, again there are legit people that need asssistance and help. We have a friend who has a son w/ cerbral paulsy, almost all of their assit with bills and nursing comes from donations and charities..not the govt."....you said almost all of their bills...I'm sorry but I don't believe this person doesn't get social security disability or SSI....as their son gets older, and the parents are gone, what happens to the kid? If Obamacare gets repealed, what happens if their son gets dropped from his insurance and cannot get other insurance with a pre-existing condition. Part of governments job is to provide a safety net and there's nothing wrong with that; it's not socialism and it's not stealing from anyone!
why do you think it's appropriate for you to demonize the disabled, senior citizens, children and soldiers? Most people would agree with you that there is a population that is exploiting the system but what did old people do? You're not comprehending the issue here. If he had not included those disinfranchised marginalized groups, we would all be voting Romney. But he didnt! He pointed the finger at them and that is unamerican. You do not get to throw insults and demand that soldiers do more to support themselves after they returned from fighting to defend us. You know his comments are wrong.
Concerned - you do make me question redistribution of wealth. Why should I have to pay for your whiny ass obligations to the cretins you raise? I can only hope their outcome is to be more informed and interested in society than you will ever be. Now go jump on a cruise ship - your kids need a 'brake' from your ill-advised parenting.
The test of our progress and prosperity is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough to those that have too little.
This is what SS was created for and they didn't borrow from it they put it in the general fund and used it to pay for things it was never intended. To this day they still collect more than they pay out but that will be coming to an end very soon. If it had been left alone by our esteemed congress it would be a fund that would have been able to cover its costs easily.
Money sitting around was just too tempting for our politicians.
Mitt Romney's wife has MS. Where would she be, possibly, without her Husband? In the 47%.
They are also Mormons if it really matters to anyone.
Could be that she would be uninsured due to her pre-existing condition.
So Romney was "inarticulate" according to Romney, and got his issues "mixed up" according to Norquist.
Romney was speaking to a bunch of friendly faces, people who were wealthy like him, people who supported him, and he couldn't even be ""articulate" or get his issues straight???
What is going to happen during the debates when he is asked questions on sensitive topics, like taxes, or healthcare...what is going to happen when President Obama refutes what he said, or points out the lies and inaccuracies. Good golly if Mitt can't keep it together in front of a friendly bunch....he will never, ever, be able to debate President Obama.
Hey how about when romney calls obama out on his lies and radical statements?
oil: Romney will be too "inarticulate" and have his issues "mixed up".....how will he even be able to put 2 sentences together, let alone refute anything President Obama says???
Not hard to refute obama and his lies which are many. look i gave obama a fair shot, i looked past some of the stuff that was out there about him, but the fact is he is in over his head and is not doing a good job. its time for a change
What lies and radical statements OilShark1? Please do tell us what crazy you're living in today?
I find it perplexing you actually believe you have a valid point of view.
Dan, im not going to convince you no matter what facts i have to back it up so what does it matter. Funny how you live in a state based on almost pure conservative principals that has a thriving economy and yet you are a bozo defender.
Barack Obama boosted by skewed NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll
September 18, 2012
By: Dean Chambers
U.S. President Barack Obama speaks to supporters on September 17, 2012 in Columbus, Ohio. President Obama spent the day in Ohio campaigning in Cincinnati and Columbus.
While the new Rasmussen Reports daily tracking poll released today shows a two point Mitt Romney lead in the presidential race, the new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released today shows President Obama leading by five percent, 50 percent to 45 percent. This survey of 736 likely voters, with a margin of error of 3.6 percent, was conducted between September 12-16. Unskewed, the data for this polls shows Romney leading seven points, 51 percent to 44 percent.
The sample included 32 percent Democrats, 38 percent independents and 25 percent Republicans. This poll clearly under-sample Republican voters. This data clearly differs with the Rasmussen Reports partisan data measured from hundreds of thousands of voters by Rasmussen Reports, which measures the partisan percentages at 37.6 percent Republicans, 33.3 percent Democrats and 29.2 percent independents. The difference means the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll over-sampled Democratic voters by seven percent more than Republicans and a 11 percent more than the four percent Republican edge shown by the Rasmussen data.
While the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll did not disclose the cross-tabs for presidential preference among Republicans, Democrats and independents, that information was calculated by extrapolation. That estimate shows Republicans and Democrats each supported their own nominee by a margin of approximately 95 percent to 5 percent while independent voters narrowly supporter Romney 48 percent to 41 percent for Obama.
When the data from the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll is unskewed by weighting their reported percentages between Romney and Obama to the partisan affiliations showed by Rasmussen's extensive data results on that issue, the overall picture of Obama's approval to disapproval rating is different. With Republicans weighted 37.6 percent, Democrats at 33.3 percent and Independents at 29.2 percent, the results calculate to 44 percent approval to 54 percent disapproval. Likewise, instead of the reported 50 percent to 45 percent lead for Obama, the data actually indicates a Romney lead of 51 percent to 44 percent.
This survey is not the only such poll recently to be skewed by over-sampling Democrats to skew the results in favor of Barack Obama. Earlier this week, the latest CNN/ORC poll was similarly skewed. Last month on the Fox News segment "Campaign Insiders" today, Democratic pollsters Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen both confirmed their belief that major polls are skewed in favor of the Democrats by over-sampling of Democratic voters when the surveys are conducted.
So many of these skewed polls have been unskewed here in this column they are now averaged, in unskewed form, in the new UnskewedPolls.com UnSkewed Average of Polls that today shows Romney leading by 7.8 percent
@ oilshark1 That's about what I thought you would say. Facts huh? That's cute.
I don't think you actually have any idea what it's like here in Texas or you wouldn't speak so ignorantly about it. Defender? lol you have no idea what my views are except that I view you as an idiot. Just keep blah blah blahing your way through life maybe you'll find other idiots to keep you company.
Fortunately Oil has Rush Limbaugh to keep him company. He's spewing almost verbatim what Rush said on his show yesterday. It's too bad really. Most of the people who post here have strong opinions - of THEIR OWN - and don't need to regurgitate.
Obama/Biden 2012
A ha ha. What a coupla dopes - Dumb and Dumber.
Ryan wants to dismantle Social Security, which fits nicely with Romney's belief that Seniors and the rest of the supposed 47% "don't matter."
Buh-bye campaign.
I'm sorry, Congressman Ryan, but that is NOT what Mr. Romney said.
Here is what Mr. Romney said...
"There are 47% of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47% 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. ... I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for for their lives."
Mr. Romney said nothing about President Obama's economic policies or that the 47% were somehow victims of the President's economic policies. He said they BELIEVE they are victims and that they BELIEVE they are entitled to care by the government. He believes, based on his comments, that these people have CHOSEN their dependence, not that they were forced there.
I'm sorry, Congressman, but your spin isn't going to work.
For Ryan to say that Romney's comments are "inarticulate, but the point still stands," doesn't change the fact what Romney said is an insult and wrong. To put it another way, Ryan's comment is tantamount to Romney calling the President a "Jiggaboo" and saying it was an inarticulate reference to the president's race, but the point still stands that he'a blackman. Why are you even referencing something that is based on a deliberately distorted percentage perpetuated by Erik Erickson and conservative blogosphere jacka$$es?
Well-said
It is a fact that about 47% of Americans in 2011 paid no federal income tax (which is not to say that they paid no taxes). It is also reasonable to say that President Obama is almost certain to get at least 47% of the popular vote against Mitt Romney on election day, in the absence of any major third party candidates this cycle.
It is utterly fallacious to conflate those two numbers as representing the same set of Americans, and no amount of articulation can cover that up, nor the right wing accusation that if you vote for Obama or any Democrat, then you must be a voluntarily unemployed, lazy parasite looking for handouts.
Mitt Romney is the prince looking for his pauper, just wishing he could trade places and see how incredibly easy the poor have it.
For all the right wing koolade drinkers (you know who you are), Romney is hyper critical of those not paying taxes-because of tax breaks in the tax code- and yet this lying, hypocritical and immoral pseudochristian pays less than 14% in taxes because of the breaks in the tax code. He saves millions and yet is critical if someone making 25,000 a year gets a few hundred dollars in a tax break. What do you say about that?
And that's only in the ONE tax return that he's willing to release... makes you wonder what we'd find if we had a look at the rest of them... who wants to bet $10k that he's one of the millionaires who pays next to nothing in taxes, EVERY year?? He won't show his history of tax returns, he won't get specific on what tax loopholes he's looking to close so he won't tell the American people what their taxes will be, he freely states that he won't pay one penny of taxes more than he is required to according to the tax code then pisses all over the so called 47% of the constituency that he wants to lead who are DOING THE SAME THING? Romney's not an A-hole... that's too high a grade for him... he's a real F-hole!
Bunch of freeloaders!!!
In 2011, 78,000 tax filers with incomes between $211,000 and $533,000 paid no income taxes; 24,000 households with incomes of $533,000 to $2.2 million paid no income taxes, and 3,000 tax filers with incomes above $2.2 million paid no income taxes.
Additionally, according to 2008 data from the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, eight of the top 10 states with the lowest income tax liability are Republican-leaning states. The other two are Florida, a battleground state, and New Mexico, which CBS News rates as likely Obama territory.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57515033-503544/fact-checking-romneys-47-percent-comment/
71% of taxes paid in America are paid by the very people you reference above. Id say thats a far cry more than the real 47% that pay no taxes. Can you buy groceries without cash or credit? In the same way, People that dont pay taxes and are on govt assistance should never, ever, under any circumstances, be allowed to vote. Alexis de Tocqueville had it 100% correct. But my guess is, Democrats have no idea who he is.
All that will exist when this is permitted to go on for an extended period is regression from democracy to dictatorship, as proved over the centuries. America is not a new experiment. We are on track to fail like the previous empires.
When previous empires died, the first ones to die were the moochers. It will be no different here.
That's the problem, Puddin'... America is NOT an EMPIRE and as such shouldn't be run as one... Mitt's not running for President, he's trying to become Emperor Robme! Will you show your fealty by bowing and kissing his ring?
Tell you one thing, the day he becomes President is the day I begin my paperwork to become Canadian, that fool is no President of mine... And before you begin the Flame Wars. I LOVE this country and always have... red, white, and blue blood flows through my veins. But when I see the direction Repubs like Romney and Ryan, Boehner and McConnell and Cantor are trying to steer this country, the despicable voter suppression they're tying to pull, the 'small gov't' guys who are trying to regulate every pregnancy in the nation, the military posturing that will get us drawn into unwinable conflicts in Syria and Iran...
I see the specter of a future where I no longer recognize the values of this country as the values that were instilled in me as an American boy; fair-play, honesty, dignity in success and in loss, that if the only way to elevate yourself is by stepping on the heads of your fellow citizens is no way to live or live with yourself.
Republicans like these, who are willing to tank the entire economy to keep Obama from scoring as few points as possible, are actively trying to put the kibosh on my American Dream, and if they succeed then the hollow shell of this once great country will be no place that I want to hang my hat or the welfare and futures of my children.
Thanks, Steve. Very well said.
Obama/Biden 2012
Ryan either doesn't get it or he's putting up the campaign facade. The reason that this is a big story is not because of the way Romney said what the said - in fact, it was the most fluid and natural delivery of his message during the whole campaign. It's because no one's seen Romney's core beliefs up until now, and now that it's out there it's repulsive to everyone but the extreme right wing of the Repub party.
For Ryan to say that Romney's comments are "inarticulate, but the point still stands," doesn't change the fact what Romney said is an insult and wrong.
Insult and wrong aside, the entire issue aside - his own VP said his comments are "inarticulate."
Whatever side of the issue one is on, is it too much to ask for a candidate to be at the very least competent and articulate?
Doubtless some here will not agree with Reagan's policies, but whatever else, he could at least speak clearly and was straight about what he believed in so you could argue it or champion it as the case may be. William Buckley as well. Conservatives have had a history of good communicators, whatever the value (or lack) of the policy.
This? What is this infirmity of purpose?
O, what a noble mind is here o'erthrown!
The courtier's, soldier's, scholar's, eye, tongue, sword,
Th' expectation and rose of the fair state,
The glass of fashion and the mould of form,
Th' observ'd of all observers, quite, quite down!
Insult and wrong aside, the entire issue aside - his own VP said his comments are "inarticulate."
^ Also makes Ryan sound smug. He's no better than Mitt at communicating. He tried to explain why he didn't give specifics on his tax plan by saying that they want to have the debate in public.
What?
You hide your plans from the public, in order to facilitate a public debate?
Ryan is a young man with all the bad habits of and old double talkingpolitical con mon.
concernedone
I'm going to write in John Huntsman on the ballot....... Either that, or this Republican isn't going to vote at all....
You're a thoughtful person. At the risk of being a wise @$$, which I'm not trying to be (at least not this instant), unfortunately, the Republican party seems to consist of very few thoughtful people. Mitt is the best of a bad lot. Look back on the primaries. How many of the candidates stated that they didn't believe in evolution? You had Rick Perry practically bragging about how he flunked out of pre-veterinary classes at Texas A&M. The party seems to have real problems with anyone with gray matter that exceeds dull normal. The only thing that I agree with Rick Santorum on is that the Republicans will not attract smart people. Until people like you take back the party, this is going to go on indefinitely.
Auntie,
Saw a quote (source was a poster on another website) that so simply, yet effectively crystalizes your point, so I just had to share:
"There are only two types of Republicans: rich and stupid. The rich work to keep the stupid stupid and the stupid work to keep the rich rich."
Ryan either doesn't get it or he's putting up the campaign facade.
^ or both.
this guy is an Ayn Rand fan.
she believes Jesus was an inferior moral philospher because he advocated charity and helping the poor.
she was an athiest who conflated the soul with the 'ego', and so found Christ to be contradictory.
in other words - your goal is not to save your soul via morality, which has to do with how you treat others, but to indulge your own needs, and so fullfill your ego.
this is what Ryan believes.
Pomney's statement was dumb, but still it holds water. Obama's approach is "free stuff for everybody!". He is trying to create a democratic voting bloc that will keep them in power for years to come. Any rational thinking person understands that our worst crisis facing this nation is our crushing debt. We can barely pay the interest on the loan! Even hypocritical Obama understands this. He said:
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt
limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government
cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial
assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal
policies. Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and
internationally. Leadership means that, "the buck stops here.' Instead,
Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our
children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of
leadership. Americans deserve better.”
Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006
"Free stuff for everybody?"
That's the problem. You see a different Obama than I see.
I would agree there's a lot of excessive spending in politics BUT we're talking about Romney here and the statement he made. His statement was about returned soldiers, senior citizens, people loving in poverty (making under 20k a year) and children. These are protected groups that have worked hard and deserve better treatment. These are not the moochers of society. If anything, we should be giving them even more as a thank you for funding our social security programs and defending this country after 9/11.
Have you ever taken maternity leave? If so, Romney is talking trash about you too.
Pomney's statement was dumb, but still it holds water
^ That statement itself is a contradiction.
ScommaG:
You don't make any sense.
of course it doesn't to someone like you Conservative... it can't get past the walls of the bubble you live in
P Roberson-of course not, you can't see past your nose.
The thing is Romney _was— articulate, but the point was not sound and should not stand. Basically, he said that 47% of the people are moochers. Even if that were true it would be nuts to try to govern such a country by slandering nearly half of it right out of the gate. But the vast percentage of that 47% are either hard working, lower income families or elderly people. Only a small fraction could be framed as more or less welfare recipients -- and clearly Romney was trying to set up welfare dependent, professional "victims" as the backbone of that 47%. And it is by no means a settled point that welfare recipients are moochers -- there but for the grace of various factors go many of us. Not inarticulate. Romney was actually pretty clear, and wrong -- and either stupid or craven in face of the facts. Not to mention that many of the states with the highest % not paying fed taxes tend to vote Republican.
Not to mention that many of the states with the highest % not paying fed taxes tend to vote Republican.
_________________________________________
Sheer cognative dissonance, particularly among blue color voters and retirees in the south.
The elderly who love medicare, but vote GOP even knowing that Ryan want's to turn it into vouchercare and thus destroy it.
The working class student who has a job and is trying to work their way through college and pay back a student loan, yet oblivous to how the student loan program worked as welfare for banks who had government guarantee's on profits for the loans, that you were forced to pay via high interest rates.
President Obama cut the banks out of the middle, so reducing costs to students by 1000's of dollars.
Ryan and Romney would put the banks back in the game, and so pile debt on to the backs of working students.
GOP is good at one thing - getting folks to vote directly against their own interest, by appealing to false-pride, bigotry, ignorance and hate.
Why do Pubtards keep digging in the same hole.
Some of you have a real hard-on for Romney because he is rich. Let me remind of a few important facts.
Our folks in Wash DC as a whole are all very wealthy group of folks. To the tune of over 2 billion dollars in worth between the group of them. Do you really think having a "neighborhood activist" has been successful. Oh sure, we have a great housing market, my house is worth 40% of what it was once worth, or perhaps all those great jobs he's created,,,,, let's see who's hiring, Walmart, Subway, McDonald's, or perhaps you can make donuts??? Great jobs, part time at that.
So guess what, poor, or we we call the 47% don't create jobs, except at the welfare office or food stamps, perhaps Medicaid or Unemployment office. Oh wait, those are government jobs that are funded by taxes... Not a good thing to have. So guess what, let's have somebody who came from nothing that actually became wealthy, and in return created jobs. And yes, if you are successful, and you decide to "close" a company that you own because it is not profitable, then guess what, that's what anyone but the government does when something cost more than it produces.
So guess what, deal with the facts. The reason GM is making money is not because of Obama, it's because they filed bankruptcy along with receiving a huge 33% reduction via wage concessions & benefits from the unions. Getting rid of all those law suits really helps the bottom line, along with NOT PAYING CREDITORS, along with cutting retirement benefits to past employees by 50% is the reason. Of course an increase in sales doesn't hurt. You see I worked for GM for 20 years, I know all about the cycle. When vehicle sales fall by 20-35% for 3 years, you get in return a 4-6 million void in the flow of vehicles, thus causing a need for new & used vehicles out of absolute necessity. Prime rates at 0% doesn't hurt. So let's get real on one last point, for those of you who actually believe that Romney or other wealthy people are the only ones who don't feel like paying excessive tax on tax on top of tax is fair, they then, (just like the rest of use whatever means they can not to throw their wealth away on excessive taxes. let's look at our previous presidential candidate (Democrat) who is a billionaire Mr. Kerry. This Democrat (Mass), or (taxachuset) purchased his latest yacht for some (5 million) plus dollars, yet, he chose to register & dock it, not in his own state he represented in the Senate, but register out of state because if he registered it in Mass., where he sails it there because he has a home on M.Vineyard, he would be subject to not only a state sales tax of almost 10% of the purchase price, but a yearly tax based on the value. What does he get for all those extra yearly taxes, nothing. So guess what, he got caught, and had to write that huge check, and now every year he pays it. Actually, I'll bet since the stink of it is out of the news, he has probably re-register it in the Caymen Islands as most mega yacht owners do. So get over the Romney hatred, let's get somebody in the WH. that actually creates jobs & is not a neighborhood organizer.
We're NOT kidding you, Kidding Me!!! How about you read this and then tell US how Mitt's gonna create jobs for the masses?
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/greed-and-debt-the-true-story-of-mitt-romney-and-bain-capital-20120829
Then try and forget for a moment the color of a president's skin and look at your own finances and tell yourself that Mitt will be good for your situation. If you bring in $200-250,000 a year or more, he probably will be. Otherwise, you're are voting against your own best interest... whenever you cast your ballot for him
you must be kidding me... No but the GOP IS.
Sir you are a total Bore. With fuzzy math. We had EIGHT long years of Your "Bush" We got
"9/11", Huge deficit's (Cheney said they don't Matter???) Two wars..(against the wrong country) Housing bubbles, huge lay offs, record poverty, unemployment the list goes on & on & on...
And The RICH ran amok (banks, wall street, oil co.) and all the time MITT Witt was Outsourcing JOBS. Nice.
And you want to Give That group another shot at US.? What ya putting in that Tea?
And BTW...where are those Tax returns Mitt? We are waiting!
Romney's official attack dog, "Ryan" is suppose to take the heat off of Romney, but has only offered a supportive statement of Mitt's undercover disaster.
While Romney/Ryan's disparaging view of 47% of Americans gives them acceptance from their base, it does not garner them any positive numbers from the 10% they seem to be targeting, the Independents.
Why do voters from both parties continue to file as Independents?
Mitt's hoping that we aren't thoughtful enough to vote beyond our emotions, because many of us already have concluded that we don't like him.
Well, if I may ask, are you a disabled VET, if so thank you for your service, no further comment is directed at you. If you are disabled, as so many Americans are, because of their own stupidity, then listen up. I have five neighbors that are on permanent SSI Disability. The first is a 19 year old who was riding his dirt bike on the powerlines at 1:00 AM drunk off his ass with no helmet or headlights on & ran across a paved road, hit a car and is now a walking zombie. Three others are to obese to walk & having so many health problems in their 30's to 50's as a result of their excessive obesity they are at the doctors or emergency room via shuttle service or ambulance every other day. The fifth one is a 30 year old meth/crack addictive living at parents house that is in & out of jail or rehab every other week, and her two kids are on welfare. So guess what, we have an issue as American tax payers, we can't afford to keep paying for these circumstances. If they can't control their own stupidity & addictions, screw them, I don't want to pay for their inability to control or think about the possible outcome of their lives do to their bad choices. I'm tired of paying for them. If you are a LIBERAL, and you want to support these idiots, that's your choice, but don't expect to include me in your stupidity. It's my money, not yours, so spend yours your way, I'll spend mine the way I want to.
Are You...
Good luck cupcake...just hope you never need a hand. God teaches hard lessons to people like you.
So You listen up. Your day will come when you see the total inhumanity you have in your black heart.
I will continue taking care of my fellow humans.
re: rational thinking person understands that our worst crisis facing this nation is our crushing debt...
^ Then *no rational person* can support Romney.
He wants trillions of dollars in tax cuts for the rich, and trillions in increased military spending.
Every study done of his plan indicates logically that this adds trillions to the national debt.
Why do you pretend to care about the national debt, and then turn around and support Romney who's plans make it much, much worse!!!
That is the worst kind of completely illogical, utterly irrational, unbelievably phony hypocrisy.
^ Moreover, R-Money wasn't even ranting about debt, because he doesn't give a fig about it.
He was simply expressing his rich-man's contempt for the middle class, and his smug sense of superiority to them.
These guys like debt, because they can use it as an excuse to destroy social security, medicare and student loans all of which they hate.
When are GOP lackeys going to clue themselves in to how their own party works?
I think he was re-stating his stance that there are already programs in place for the unemployed and elderly. His point being to take better care of the working taxpayer who sees money leaving his-her paycheck every couple weeks and never sees any benefit from it. Why? Because it is "redistributed" to lifetime welfare recipients who pro-create for extra money, and for foreign aid to countries that murder our Ambassadors and drag their body through the street
I for one agree--RomneyRyan 2012!!
Really? If you make less than 60K a year and have a family you likely are one of these moochers...no better than the welfare moms you disparage...a moocher is a moocher is a moocher no matter how they got there...
Matt...Why must you think that the only place taxpayers dollars go to are welfare recipients? Think for a moment. Eighteen percent of the 49% that pay no federal income taxes and no payroll taxes are seniors. They pay no federal income tax for the same reason that 4000 millionaires pay no federal income tax. IT'S WHAT THE TAX CODE ALLOWS!!!! And the poor did not write the tax code of the United States.
Do you think that a $300 a month check creates retirement income or that someone can live off of that?
Get real!
The GOP should just admit it: they hate half the country, are willing to almost tolerate 30% of it (in some circumstances), think 10% is okay, and luuuv the top 10%. Be honest for a change. Well, disregard that last; it's like asking a poisonous toad to change its poison glands to perfume glands.
Romney 1040!
Matt/Rick--Did either of you go to college??? Did you take out loans? If so, you are using one of the so-called "programs" Romney is talking about. Ditto for a mortgage on a house. What he does not include are the tax havens for the wealthy so that he, a multi-millionaire, can stash his cash in the Cayman Islands, the Bahamas and Bermuda and only pay 13% federal tax. There are programs for every group.
Good point Jane! We must demand Romney show his college records. America needs to know everything about a person that will be in the highest office of the land.
Don't you agree?