Romney at a fundraiser talking about Obama supporters

Fantastic, because yesterday somebody wrote an in-depth article to clarify this point for you.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...o_guns_or_religion_which_gaffe_is_worse_.html


Worth reading the whole thing as it puts Obama's remark in context, but this is the key difference right here:

 

the difference


Obama was aspiring to become president of all of America, even that part most hostile to him, in the belief that what they shared mattered more than what divided them. Romney genuinely seems to conceive of the lowest-earning half of the population as implacably hostile parasites.

 

Another major gaffe from the Republican nominee. Even the Weekly Standard calls Romney's comment "arrogant and stupid".

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/note-romney-s-arrogant-and-stupid-remarks_652548.html

Understandably, Kristol has to first give an example of what he considers Obama's contempt for ordinary Americans to (I suppose) be "fair and balanced". Though Obama's quote strikes me as more empathetic ("Its not surprising then they get bitter, ..."). I guess Kristol wouldn't be doing his job if he didn't manage to get in a dig at Obama somewhere there.

 

Saying some people cling to guns and religion is equivalent to calling half the population lazy bottom feeding leeches who take no responsibility for their own lives. Right .

 

that doesn't prove anything about not taking responsibility

 

Here is a chart that includes everyone.



It shows 82% of Americans work and pay taxes on more than $20k.

And most conservatives would agree that the employer's portion of the payroll tax comes out of worker's pay, thus putting those folks at a 15% rate, which of course, is higher than what Romney paid.

 

Some questions for you:

(1) Under the federal tax code, a couple with two children earning less than $26,400 will pay no federal income tax because the standard deduction and exemptions reduce their taxable income to zero. The Tax Policy Center has explained that this reflects components of “the basic progressive income tax structure that intend to exempt subsistence levels of income from tax and to adjust for differences in ability to pay based on family size. “

Do you disagree with that approach? Do you believe that this family’s tax burden is too low? If so, how would you raise it?* Eliminate the deduction for children?* Raise marginal rates? Make the tax code less progressive?

(2) Of the 47 percent of households that do not owe federal income taxes, two thirds pay payroll taxes. *And, of course, these households pay state and local sales and property taxes, plus federal gasoline and other excise taxes.

In what way do you believe these households are failing to “take personal responsibility and care for their lives”?

*(3) Of the 18 percent of households that pay neither income nor payroll taxes, most are elderly (10 percent of households). *

What do you believe these elderly households should do to “take personal responsibility and care for their lives?”*Do you support repealing special tax benefits for the elderly, such as the extra standard deduction, the tax credit for low-income seniors and the exclusion of a portion of Social Security benefits from taxation?

(4) Another 7 percent are households earning less than $20,000 a year. *That seems like a far cry from the 47 percent “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.” Do you believe in a safety net or not?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...b4491fe-0193-11e2-b257-e1c2b3548a4a_blog.html

 

I see you've decided to let your insult against veterans who've served in our nation's military stand since they receive veteran's benefits from the Federal Govt.

Your position is noted. Thank you for clarifying your disdain for our nation's servicemen and women.

 

Klein kills it.

 

But that isn't what you asked for. You asked for statistics of the people that make up the percentage and once you get it, instead of admitting you were shown up, you try to change the argument. Seems like a pretty childish way to discuss a topic. Seems like you can't argue your point. Please provide proof that the people making up that percentage are not taking responsibility. TIA!

 

Obama is lucky to be running against this idiot.

 

He' s been ridiculously lucky in that regard throughout his entire career. The toughest race he had was the primary against Hillary. He's like the Bulls clowning whatever Jazz team the Repubs want to put up against him.

 

knock yourself out...

Baseline Distribution of Tax Units with No Tax Liability, Current Law, 2004-2011

We'll expect a full retort from you once you have parsed the numbers for yourself.

Good luck, we're all counting on you.

 

bigtexxx isn't "big" enough to admit when he wrong.

it's like those animals that try to make themselves look bigger to fend people off by letting the hair stand up when they are scared.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/17/mitt-romney-video_n_1829455.html

In one of the other videos, Romney lamented, in a joking way, that he would have a better chance of being elected if his father had been ethnically Mexican, rather than born to white parents living in Mexico.

"My dad, as you probably, know was the governor of Michigan and was the head of a car company. But he was born in Mexico ... and, uh, had he been born of, uh, Mexican parents, I'd have a better shot at winning this," Romney said. "But he was unfortunately born to Americans living in Mexico. ... I mean I say that jokingly, but it would be helpful to be Latino."

In a separate video, Romney talks about his success. "Both my dad and [wife] Ann's dad did quite well in their lives. But when they came to the end of their lives and passed along the inheritance to Ann and me, we both decided to give it all away. So I have inherited nothing. Everything that Ann and I have, we earned the old-fashioned way."

Romney's parents did pay for his boarding school, his college, his graduate school and his first home.

 

Lol bigtex is hilarious

 

I would compare it to a SEC team padding its W-L record by playing a bunch of teams from the Sun Belt.

If the GOP actually put up a decent candidate, they would have more than a decent shot at the WH given the state our economy. Instead they rolled a out a field of Bible thumping crazies (Santorum, Bachman), a washed up has been (Gingrich), and an absolute dolt (Perry).

 

#47percent.

<iframe width="960" height="720" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Bg98BvqUvCc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Hey! Quick question.

Was Romney including those people, GE and Exxon in the 47%? I mean, they don't pay taxes so he must have meant them as well.

 

Truth has a known liberal bias. Republicans hate facts. :grin: