Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
Note: forcing pagination mode for this thread because of the high number of comments. (why?)

(Huffington Post)   If you're going to make scathing remarks about the voter base, make sure you're not being filmed. Right, Mitt?   ( huffingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Fail, obama, Mitt Romney, David Corn, Erick Erickson, Occupy movement, child tax credit, Laura Ingraham  
•       •       •

7694 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Sep 2012 at 7:25 PM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



972 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest

 
2012-09-17 04:12:09 PM  
i110.photobucket.com
Republicans are often assholes
 
2012-09-17 04:15:13 PM  
they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?
 
2012-09-17 04:16:12 PM  
"dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Yeah, those soldiers and veterans need to shut the f*ck up.
 
2012-09-17 04:17:05 PM  

Aarontology: "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Yeah, those soldiers and veterans need to shut the f*ck up.


And old people and children.
 
2012-09-17 04:18:39 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Aarontology: "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Yeah, those soldiers and veterans need to shut the f*ck up.

And old people and children.


It's the Republican Christian thing to do, after all.
 
2012-09-17 04:19:37 PM  
yeah, fark those people who want food and shelter!
 
2012-09-17 04:21:50 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?


Yes it is. He said 47%. 47% might want access to affordable health care insurance and employment. The number of people as a percentage that want a free ride, would in theory be at least less than the unemployment rate or do you assume all people who can't find work are lazy?
 
2012-09-17 04:22:53 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?



Yes.
 
2012-09-17 04:22:57 PM  

mrshowrules: Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?

Yes it is. He said 47%. 47% might want access to affordable health care insurance and employment. The number of people as a percentage that want a free ride, would in theory be at least less than the unemployment rate or do you assume all people who can't find work are lazy?


You're talking to a guy who honestly believes the current US government is comparable to the nazis.
 
2012-09-17 04:23:07 PM  

ManateeGag: yeah, fark those people who want food and shelter!


I want food and shelter.
 
2012-09-17 04:23:52 PM  

Aarontology: You're talking to a guy who honestly believes the current US government is comparable to the nazis.


dancininanson.net
 
2012-09-17 04:24:07 PM  

Aarontology: "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Yeah, those soldiers and veterans need to shut the f*ck up.


I for one don't consider compensation for services rendered the same thing as public entitlements.
 
2012-09-17 04:24:23 PM  
Go f*ck yourself, Mitt

/seriously, FOAD
 
2012-09-17 04:24:33 PM  

Aarontology: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Aarontology: "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Yeah, those soldiers and veterans need to shut the f*ck up.

And old people and children.

It's the Republican Christian thing to do, after all.


And lo Jesus took one loaf of bread and made everyone bootstraps.
 
2012-09-17 04:26:28 PM  

Blues_X: Yes.


But...


Aarontology: Yeah, those soldiers and veterans need to shut the f*ck up


Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: And old people and children


ManateeGag: yeah, fark those people who want food and shelter!


Those three statements seem to suggest that soldiers, old people, children and people who want food and shelter are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Which is it?
 
2012-09-17 04:26:34 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?


It assumes that those three things are readily available, with no chance of exception or failure, to anyone who wants it. There's a reason we have safety nets, and it's not just because it's the human, civilized thing to have.
 
2012-09-17 04:27:53 PM  
Fundamental ideological differences: Liberals fear something bad will happen to someone who doesn't deserve it. Conservatives fear something good will happen to someone who doesn't deserve it.
 
2012-09-17 04:29:52 PM  

Nabb1: I for one don't consider compensation for services rendered the same thing as public entitlements.


I for one, consider both to be forms of welfare.
 
2012-09-17 04:30:04 PM  

Bloody William: It assumes that those three things are readily available


They are.
 
2012-09-17 04:31:16 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Bloody William: It assumes that those three things are readily available

They are.


Bloody William: Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?

It assumes that those three things are readily available, with no chance of exception or failure, to anyone who wants it. There's a reason we have safety nets, and it's not just because it's the human, civilized thing to have.


YOU COULDN'T EVEN QUOTE THE FULL SENTENCE AND THE CONTEXT THEREIN.
 
2012-09-17 04:31:47 PM  

Bloody William: YOU COULDN'T EVEN QUOTE THE FULL SENTENCE AND THE CONTEXT THEREIN.


he's a teabagger, what do you expect?
 
2012-09-17 04:33:12 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?


No. I believe peopled are entitled to those things. It is farking ludicrous to even entertain the thought that 47% of the country agrees with me.

Bloody William

Liberals fear something bad will happen to someone who doesn't deserve it care. Conservatives fear something good will happen to someone who doesn't deserve it.
 
2012-09-17 04:34:23 PM  

vartian: Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?

No. I believe peopled are entitled to those things. It is farking ludicrous to even entertain the thought that 47% of the country agrees with me.


It's also ludicrous to entertain the thought that the two aforementioned statements overlap completely as a single statement about a single group.
 
2012-09-17 04:34:26 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Go f*ck yourself, Mitt

 
2012-09-17 04:36:18 PM  

Bloody William: Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?

It assumes that those three things are readily available, with no chance of exception or failure, to anyone who wants it. There's a reason we have safety nets, and it's not just because it's the human, civilized thing to have.


Further, he phrased it in such a way that he asserted people want the government to give them those things. I don't know very many people who want life handed to them, because it's bare-bones no-frills kind of life (comparitively speaking vs. other American families, before we get into a pissing contest about mud huts in Africa).

I think those people are just glad knowing the government is available to help them get those things if all other avenues have failed. The alternative is a governing strategy and party that literally, and completely, ignores the plight of people who have fallen on hard times and actively ushers them along the path to ruin. The party that wants to get rid of welfare, of affordable health care, of women's rights to make decisions for their own bodies, of tax credits that benefit the poor, of progressive taxation, of food stamp eligibility, I mean the list just keeps on going.

They are beyond "got mine, f**k you". They seem to believe that failure should just about be punished, and the dregs of society should be encouraged to die, quickly and quietly and without making all that fuss, so the well-to-do can continue their lives of blissful ignorance without having to cast eyes upon the filth.
 
2012-09-17 04:36:50 PM  

mrshowrules: 47% might want access to affordable health care insurance and employment. The number of people as a percentage that want a free ride, would in theory be at least less than the unemployment rate or do you assume all people who can't find work are lazy?


47% is equal to the percentage of people that didn't pay federal INCOME taxes in 2009 (but still paid federal FICA and excise taxes).

Note: When looking at "taxes as percentage of income", remember Romney's income tax is 13%
growlersoftware.com
 
2012-09-17 04:37:34 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Aarontology: "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Yeah, those soldiers and veterans need to shut the f*ck up.

And old people and children.


And half the country.
 
2012-09-17 04:38:18 PM  

Bloody William:

It's also ludicrous to entertain the thought that the two aforementioned statements overlap completely as a single statement about a single group.


Exactly. I know plenty of people who support the idea of a universal health care system, but are all "fark those people in section 8 housing." And every one of them already has heath care.

But no, Republicans...47% of the country is a sucking vortex of entitlement that produces nothing. Your vote this election is the only thing keeping a FEMA trailer out of your backyard.
 
2012-09-17 04:38:22 PM  
"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what," Romney says in one clip. "All right -- there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent on government, who believe that, that they are victims, who believe that government has the responsibility to care for them. Who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing."

I am part of the 47% and I am not dependent on the government for anything besides roads, public schools, fire department, police etc.

I don't need housing, food or health care provided from the government.

Does Romney truly believe that EVERYONE who votes for Obama is on the dole?
 
2012-09-17 04:38:48 PM  

vartian: Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?

No. I believe peopled are entitled to those things. It is farking ludicrous to even entertain the thought that 47% of the country agrees with me.


No, they aren't. You're not entitled to anything else from anyone else. Providing for those who cannot provide for themselves is charity, and there's nothing wrong with helping people. But no one has a right to demand the government provide them anything. "A government that has the power to give you something has the power to take it away." - Thomas Jefferson. If you can provide yourself with the necessities in life, you have no right to demand others do so for you.
 
2012-09-17 04:39:39 PM  
99.999% of "humans" believe they are entitled to food and shelter.
 
2012-09-17 04:39:55 PM  

Nabb1: No, they aren't. You're not entitled to anything else from anyone else. Providing for those who cannot provide for themselves is charity, and there's nothing wrong with helping people. But no one has a right to demand the government provide them anything. "A government that has the power to give you something has the power to take it away." - Thomas Jefferson. If you can provide yourself with the necessities in life, you have no right to demand others do so for you.


So does that mean I can have the money back that was given to Louisiana after the hurricanes and the oil spill?
 
2012-09-17 04:40:42 PM  

vartian: I believe peopled are entitled to those things.


At least you agree with the statement and are happy to admit it. Everyone else does but seems to be bothered by that fact.
 
2012-09-17 04:41:17 PM  

Aarontology: Nabb1: No, they aren't. You're not entitled to anything else from anyone else. Providing for those who cannot provide for themselves is charity, and there's nothing wrong with helping people. But no one has a right to demand the government provide them anything. "A government that has the power to give you something has the power to take it away." - Thomas Jefferson. If you can provide yourself with the necessities in life, you have no right to demand others do so for you.

So does that mean I can have the money back that was given to Louisiana after the hurricanes and the oil spill?


What's your own personal stake in that? Like six bucks? Do you accepts the PayPal?
 
2012-09-17 04:41:24 PM  
5% of Farkers are Social Darwinists.
 
2012-09-17 04:41:34 PM  

Nabb1: "A government that has the power to give you something has the power to take it away." - Thomas Jefferson. If you can provide yourself with the necessities in life, you have no right to demand others do so for you.


"The poor who have neither property, friends, nor strength to
labor, are boarded in the houses of good farmers, to whom a
stipulated sum is annually paid. To those who are able to help
themselves a little, or have friends from whom they derive some
succor, inadequate however to their full maintenance,
supplementary aids are given which enable them to live
comfortably in their own houses, or in the houses of their
friends."

-Thomas Jefferson. Notes on Virginia, 1782.
 
2012-09-17 04:41:46 PM  

Nabb1:

No, they aren't. You're not entitled to anything else from anyone else. Providing for those who cannot provide for themselves is charity, and there's nothing wrong with helping people. But no one has a right to demand the government provide them anything. "A government that has the power to give you something has the power to take it away." - Thomas Jefferson. If you can provide yourself with the necessities in life, you have no right to demand others do so for you.


Look, make the "we're all in this alone" argument with me until you pass out, it will never farking sell with me. We are beholden to each other as a country and should provide a basic level of existence and support to our fellow citizens. Period.

You want me to value money over humanity, a proposition that would be humorous if it wasn't so damn sad.
 
2012-09-17 04:42:07 PM  

Nabb1: Providing for those who cannot provide for themselves is charity, and there's nothing wrong with helping people


Oh man...you say stuff like that and you fark up their whole way of thinking.
 
2012-09-17 04:42:31 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: vartian: I believe peopled are entitled to those things.

At least you agree with the statement and are happy to admit it. Everyone else does but seems to be bothered by that fact.


I own my fuzzy liberalism, good sir :)
 
2012-09-17 04:43:38 PM  

vartian: Look, make the "we're all in this alone" argument with me until you pass out, it will never farking sell with me


How about you take care of yourself FIRST, then look to help others?
 
2012-09-17 04:44:14 PM  

vartian: I own my fuzzy liberalism, good sir :)


:)
 
2012-09-17 04:44:30 PM  

vartian: Dancin_In_Anson: vartian: I believe peopled are entitled to those things.

At least you agree with the statement and are happy to admit it. Everyone else does but seems to be bothered by that fact.

I own my fuzzy liberalism, good sir :)


I freely admit it, too. Though I think DIA's trying to ignore my existence after I pointed out how utterly full of shiat he is both in quoting me and in presenting two potentially exclusive statements as one consistent one.
 
2012-09-17 04:44:57 PM  
Christ, I would think that we would want to be living in a society in which we considered keeping our people fed to be a minimum standard.
 
2012-09-17 04:45:26 PM  

Hollie Maea: Christ, I would think that we would want to be living in a society in which we considered keeping our people fed to be a minimum standard.


If people want bread to live, they'll have to work harder. Then they can have cake.
 
2012-09-17 04:47:03 PM  
But Obama is the divisive one. Right.
 
2012-09-17 04:47:24 PM  

Nabb1: What's your own personal stake in that? Like six bucks? Do you accepts the PayPal?


I want interest, too. Like you said, you aren't entitled to anything from anyone else, and you don't have the right to demand the government provide you with anything. Your flood protection and oil spill clean up aren't any different than someone else's food stamps.
 
2012-09-17 04:48:34 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: vartian: Look, make the "we're all in this alone" argument with me until you pass out, it will never farking sell with me

How about you take care of yourself FIRST, then look to help others?


What does this even mean? I work 55+ hours a week. I have health insurance. I'm good. This changes nothing about the level of poverty in this country.

It is bizarre how some of you guys come up against compassion and can think of nothing else to do but shout at it until it goes away.
 
2012-09-17 04:50:55 PM  

Bloody William: It assumes that those three things are readily available, with no chance of exception or failure, to anyone who wants it. There's a reason we have safety nets, and it's not just because it's the human, civilized thing to have.


I would suggest that in America those three things are readily available without exception or failure to anyone who wants it.

That's a problem. We have confused want with need.
 
2012-09-17 04:51:40 PM  

Aarontology: Nabb1: What's your own personal stake in that? Like six bucks? Do you accepts the PayPal?

I want interest, too. Like you said, you aren't entitled to anything from anyone else, and you don't have the right to demand the government provide you with anything. Your flood protection and oil spill clean up aren't any different than someone else's food stamps.


I don't think our flood protection is an entitlement. Considering that the city itself is a major port and is the largest confluence of brown water, blue water and rail shipping in North America, it is an important city to the nation. Protecting it is a good idea, but not an entitlement. Same with cleaning up BP's mess, which, BTW, BP should be footing in its entirety. It's their responsibility to pay for the damage they caused, but I don't think it's something we are "entitled to" from the government. Again, is it a good idea to restore damages wetlands from the oil spill? Of course. Is it an entitlement? No, it is not.
 
2012-09-17 04:52:00 PM  

vartian: What does this even mean? I work 55+ hours a week. I have health insurance. I'm good. This changes nothing about the level of poverty in this country.


Got any left? Check my profile. There are a couple of links I'd like you to check out. Thanks!
 
2012-09-17 04:52:36 PM  

Nabb1: Same with cleaning up BP's mess, which, BTW, BP should be footing in its entirety.


Yep.
 
2012-09-17 04:53:00 PM  

vartian: Dancin_In_Anson: vartian: Look, make the "we're all in this alone" argument with me until you pass out, it will never farking sell with me

How about you take care of yourself FIRST, then look to help others?

What does this even mean? I work 55+ hours a week. I have health insurance. I'm good. This changes nothing about the level of poverty in this country.

It is bizarre how some of you guys come up against compassion and can think of nothing else to do but shout at it until it goes away.


Who is saying we shouldn't help those in poverty? (in this thread, I mean)
 
2012-09-17 04:55:30 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Bloody William: It assumes that those three things are readily available, with no chance of exception or failure, to anyone who wants it. There's a reason we have safety nets, and it's not just because it's the human, civilized thing to have.

I would suggest that in America those three things are readily available without exception or failure to anyone who wants it.

That's a problem. We have confused want with need.


I'm going to test something.

I would suggest that in America those three things are readily available without exception or failure to anyone who needs it.

...nope, confusing it doesn't make your statement make any more sense.

My contention is that these things aren't available without exception or failure, and even with charity there are cracks through which people can fall. Are some of them lazy, even "undeserving" of those things? That doesn't change the fact that we need to close those cracks to make sure everyone gets what they need.
 
2012-09-17 04:57:49 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: vartian: Look, make the "we're all in this alone" argument with me until you pass out, it will never farking sell with me

How about you take care of yourself FIRST, then look to help others?


What do you think we're doing?
 
2012-09-17 04:59:25 PM  

Nabb1: Who is saying we shouldn't help those in poverty?


Nobody.

Bloody William: My contention is that these things aren't available without exception or failure, and even with charity there are cracks through which people can fall.


This will never change. Never. And I would suggest that a bloated federally run system is more apt to have bigger cracks.
 
2012-09-17 05:00:39 PM  

impaler: 47% is equal to the percentage of people that didn't pay federal INCOME taxes in 2009


Speaking of which, I would love to see what Romney paid in federal income taxes in 2009.
 
2012-09-17 05:01:40 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Nabb1: Who is saying we shouldn't help those in poverty?

Nobody.

Bloody William: My contention is that these things aren't available without exception or failure, and even with charity there are cracks through which people can fall.

This will never change. Never. And I would suggest that a bloated federally run system is more apt to have bigger cracks.


But you don't seem to have a problem with the cracks. In fact, your previous post to me implied that there are no cracks. The biggest people expressed by conservatives regarding the safety net isn't that the cracks are too big, but that lazy, undeserving people will receive benefits.
 
2012-09-17 05:01:49 PM  

Mark it: this video is the final stake through the heart of the Romney campaign. Election now over.

- Josh Barro (@jbarro) September 17, 2012
 
2012-09-17 05:01:52 PM  

Nabb1: I don't think our flood protection is an entitlement. Considering that the city itself is a major port and is the largest confluence of brown water, blue water and rail shipping in North America, it is an important city to the nation. Protecting it is a good idea, but not an entitlement. Same with cleaning up BP's mess, which, BTW, BP should be footing in its entirety. It's their responsibility to pay for the damage they caused, but I don't think it's something we are "entitled to" from the government. Again, is it a good idea to restore damages wetlands from the oil spill? Of course. Is it an entitlement? No, it is not.


Why can't your state pay for it? Why can't your city? Why do you need my money?

It may be smart, but smart doesn't mean my responsibility.
 
2012-09-17 05:03:20 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Mark it: this video is the final stake through the heart of the Romney campaign. Election now over.- Josh Barro (@jbarro) September 17, 2012


i50.tinypic.com
 
2012-09-17 05:07:11 PM  
For the record though, I completely support Federal involvement in recovery from hurricanes and oil spills, and I think it's appalling how quickly people forget about the Gulf.
 
2012-09-17 05:07:36 PM  

impaler: What do you think we're doing?


Creating a dependency class that come to EXPECT..."help" regardless of ability to pull themselves out otherwise.

[csb]

Local lady was offered a promotion within her place of employment. This promotion brought with it supervisory duties, more responsibilities, opportunities for further advancement, FREE training to further these opportunities and most importantly a substantial raise. Exactly the way it's supposed to work right? She turned it down because she would lose her benefits...and not the ones she already has with her employer. THAT is some farked up shiat right there and is what takes away from those that really NEED it.
[/csb]
 
2012-09-17 05:08:31 PM  

Bloody William: But you don't seem to have a problem with the cracks


I have a problem with those that expect to be taken care of regardless of ability (see above)
 
2012-09-17 05:09:32 PM  
Whar those motherf'in tax returns!? WHAR?
 
2012-09-17 05:11:39 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Bloody William: But you don't seem to have a problem with the cracks

I have a problem with those that expect to be taken care of regardless of ability (see above)


But, like the cracks, there will always be a few of them. The question is which do you think should be the higher priority: filling the cracks or weeding out the lazy?
 
2012-09-17 05:15:26 PM  
Also, you'll have to be more specific about what benefits she was keeping, from where, and what was she turning down? It sounds like she was already employed. If it would put her on a different economic level that would result in her keeping less money, there's no reason for her to quit her old job. Similarly, if the health benefits offered by her old job are greater than the increase in salary offered by her new job, there's no reason for her to quit her old job. If you offered me $5,000 more than I'm getting now but I wouldn't have as good coverage in the things I need, I'm probably going to say no.

Of course, the ACA is working to fix that issue, which will eventually mean I could consider such offers, thanks to regulations of insurance.
 
2012-09-17 05:18:14 PM  

Aarontology: For the record though, I completely support Federal involvement in recovery from hurricanes and oil spills, and I think it's appalling how quickly people forget about the Gulf.


No, I understand you are playing devil's advocate. And look, just because I don't think anyone owed it to us necessarily does not mean I am not grateful for all that was done. I am - we all are, really. But I recognize that no one had to do those things for us. Some things we do because we have to, others we do because we want to. I don't begrudge any community hit with a natural disaster when it comes time to help. But, if some city that hadn't been hit by a natural disaster wanted a billion dollars in FEMA money just because it wanted it, I'd tell them to go pound sand.
 
2012-09-17 05:19:01 PM  
So you're telling me that people who need government benefits to keep themselves and their children alive don't want to vote for the guy who wants to take those benefits away? I am thoroughly, thoroughly shocked and appalled at this horrifying corruption.
 
2012-09-17 05:19:48 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: [csb]

Local lady was offered a promotion within her place of employment. This promotion brought with it supervisory duties, more responsibilities, opportunities for further advancement, FREE training to further these opportunities and most importantly a substantial raise. Exactly the way it's supposed to work right? She turned it down because she would lose her benefits...and not the ones she already has with her employer. THAT is some farked up shiat right there and is what takes away from those that really NEED it.
[/csb]


And I turned down a $1000/year higher salary because it would raise my taxes!!!!

/We are playing "things idiots pretend happen, but don't," right?
 
2012-09-17 05:22:57 PM  

impaler: Dancin_In_Anson: [csb]

Local lady was offered a promotion within her place of employment. This promotion brought with it supervisory duties, more responsibilities, opportunities for further advancement, FREE training to further these opportunities and most importantly a substantial raise. Exactly the way it's supposed to work right? She turned it down because she would lose her benefits...and not the ones she already has with her employer. THAT is some farked up shiat right there and is what takes away from those that really NEED it.
[/csb]

And I turned down a $1000/year higher salary because it would raise my taxes!!!!

/We are playing "things idiots pretend happen, but don't," right?


I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that what he said happened in some form, just not in the way he is implying.
 
2012-09-17 05:33:28 PM  

impaler: Dancin_In_Anson: [csb]

Local lady was offered a promotion within her place of employment. This promotion brought with it supervisory duties, more responsibilities, opportunities for further advancement, FREE training to further these opportunities and most importantly a substantial raise. Exactly the way it's supposed to work right? She turned it down because she would lose her benefits...and not the ones she already has with her employer. THAT is some farked up shiat right there and is what takes away from those that really NEED it.
[/csb]

And I turned down a $1000/year higher salary because it would raise my taxes!!!!

/We are playing "things idiots pretend happen, but don't," right?


I had a secretary that had four kids and her ex was a deadbeat dad and she turned down a raise because the increase in her salary would bump her kids of LACHIP (health coverage for children of low-income families) and she couldn't afford to put them all on our plan. I didn't blamer her, frankly.

/CSB
 
2012-09-17 05:36:21 PM  
Is this where we pretend 'people who live off the government' only means minorities on food stamps and doesn't include the 40 million people on Social Security and Medicare, many of whom survive solely on those programs and vote Republican, or the defense contractors and the thousands who work for them who wouldn't have jobs without massive government funding, who also vote Republican?
 
2012-09-17 05:44:12 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Mark it: this video is the final stake through the heart of the Romney campaign. Election now over.- Josh Barro (@jbarro) September 17, 2012


There are at least 3 statements in this video that are truly terrible.
 
2012-09-17 05:53:26 PM  
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.


I am in no way the minority in this country when I say that my parents paid for nothing for me. I am lucky to say that I've had a couch to sleep on and food to eat for a few months when my marriage ended and I was starting over (thanks grandpa). I consider myself fortunate to have had that when I needed it.

I want a strong safety net in place. Whether I ever use it or not, I want it. You just never know. Plus, it is part of being a, well, civilized society.
 
2012-09-17 06:11:32 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Mark it: this video is the final stake through the heart of the Romney campaign. Election now over.- Josh Barro (@jbarro) September 17, 2012


Nate Silver @fivethirtyeight
90% of "game-changing" gaffes are less important in retrospect than they seem in the moment.
 
2012-09-17 06:12:19 PM  

impaler: /We are playing "things idiots pretend happen, but don't," right?


Oh how I wish...I really really do. And the fact that you don't believe me changes nothing.
 
2012-09-17 06:12:28 PM  

ariseatex: Dusk-You-n-Me: Mark it: this video is the final stake through the heart of the Romney campaign. Election now over.- Josh Barro (@jbarro) September 17, 2012

Nate Silver @fivethirtyeight
90% of "game-changing" gaffes are less important in retrospect than they seem in the moment.


So you're saying there are only some 'legitimate' gaffes...
 
2012-09-17 06:20:08 PM  

Tigger: ariseatex: Dusk-You-n-Me: Mark it: this video is the final stake through the heart of the Romney campaign. Election now over.- Josh Barro (@jbarro) September 17, 2012

Nate Silver @fivethirtyeight
90% of "game-changing" gaffes are less important in retrospect than they seem in the moment.

So you're saying there are only some 'legitimate' gaffes...


Nah, just a difference between everyday gaffes and game-changing gaffes. It's like gaffes are born, and they go to this nursing room where they're given the chance to grow and develop. Some of these gaffes grow to make a real difference. Others just sit there and eat paste wondering why the other little gaffes make fun of them.

This little gaffe isn't even at the point of scooting and grabbing yet. It's not time to declare it the next recipient of the Nobel Prize in Gaffology.

/still not good for Romney though
//and entirely self-inflicted
///slashies come in threes
 
2012-09-17 06:20:28 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Oh how I wish...I really really do. And the fact that you don't believe me changes nothing.


The fact you don't post specifics (are you Romney) means there's no reason to take anything away from what you said, whether it's true or not.
 
2012-09-17 06:25:41 PM  

impaler: The fact you don't post specifics (are you Romney) means there's no reason to take anything away from what you said, whether it's true or not.


Whatever works best for you. You want more? Drop me an email. dancininanson@ teh gmails
 
2012-09-17 06:26:37 PM  
His base will agree with his comments. Independents may or may not. The rest will roll their eyes and disagree.

I hope your family is doing well DIA. I seem to recall you had a few sons who left home a few years ago (graduated, and so on). Sorry if my memory is fuzzy on it.
 
2012-09-17 06:28:32 PM  

ariseatex: Dusk-You-n-Me: Mark it: this video is the final stake through the heart of the Romney campaign. Election now over.- Josh Barro (@jbarro) September 17, 2012

Nate Silver @fivethirtyeight
90% of "game-changing" gaffes are less important in retrospect than they seem in the moment.


Disagrees:

news.bbc.co.uk

www.solidprinciples.com
 
2012-09-17 06:30:40 PM  

mrshowrules: ariseatex: Dusk-You-n-Me: Mark it: this video is the final stake through the heart of the Romney campaign. Election now over.- Josh Barro (@jbarro) September 17, 2012

Nate Silver @fivethirtyeight
90% of "game-changing" gaffes are less important in retrospect than they seem in the moment.

Disagrees:

[news.bbc.co.uk image 300x300]

[www.solidprinciples.com image 400x319]


I remember watching the Dean Scream live. At the time I thought it was prime Daily Show fodder, but nothing too bad. It wasn't clear how bad it was until later.
 
2012-09-17 06:31:12 PM  

Nadie_AZ: I hope your family is doing well DIA. I seem to recall you had a few sons who left home a few years ago (graduated, and so on).


One out of college with a degree in ME and rocking along. One more working on fire/ems certification. Mamarita still rock solid and beautiful as ever. All doing well! Thanks for asking
 
2012-09-17 06:33:17 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Nadie_AZ: I hope your family is doing well DIA. I seem to recall you had a few sons who left home a few years ago (graduated, and so on).

One out of college with a degree in ME and rocking along. One more working on fire/ems certification. Mamarita still rock solid and beautiful as ever. All doing well! Thanks for asking


Good to hear. Sorry if I picked a bad thread. I hadn't seen you in a while.

/Back to our regularly scheduled disagreementfest
 
2012-09-17 06:34:14 PM  
This is not a big deal. Funny, but not a big deal. The real story is that Romney was known to give such a stupid stump speech at fundraisers and the Obama campaign was able to get someone into one to record it. Which means there are more than likely more stories like this to come out.
 
2012-09-17 06:40:07 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: impaler: The fact you don't post specifics (are you Romney) means there's no reason to take anything away from what you said, whether it's true or not.

Whatever works best for you. You want more? Drop me an email. dancininanson@ teh gmails


So is Anson a place and are you actually dancin' there?

My handle should similarly be sittin'onmyassinCali, but whatever.
 
2012-09-17 06:41:02 PM  

ariseatex: mrshowrules: ariseatex: Dusk-You-n-Me: Mark it: this video is the final stake through the heart of the Romney campaign. Election now over.- Josh Barro (@jbarro) September 17, 2012

Nate Silver @fivethirtyeight
90% of "game-changing" gaffes are less important in retrospect than they seem in the moment.

Disagrees:

[news.bbc.co.uk image 300x300]

[www.solidprinciples.com image 400x319]

I remember watching the Dean Scream live. At the time I thought it was prime Daily Show fodder, but nothing too bad. It wasn't clear how bad it was until later.


Perhaps the 90% of things that are called "game-changing" gaffes are probably mislabeled. A true game changing gaffe is unrecoverable. I think this video is exactly that although he was losing anyways.
 
2012-09-17 06:44:03 PM  

WTF Indeed: This is not a big deal. Funny, but not a big deal. The real story is that Romney was known to give such a stupid stump speech at fundraisers and the Obama campaign was able to get someone into one to record it. Which means there are more than likely more stories like this to come out.


Did you watch all the segments? He talks about using consultants who worked in various other countries and basically how the whole election is just a game. He talks about not wanting to use his wife to often because the public would get tired of her. As if he wasn't already having problems with the women's vote. He joked about the Mexican vote. Talked about being born with a silver spoon in his mouth.
 
2012-09-17 06:52:01 PM  

mrshowrules: Did you watch all the segments? He talks about using consultants who worked in various other countries and basically how the whole election is just a game. He talks about not wanting to use his wife to often because the public would get tired of her. As if he wasn't already having problems with the women's vote. He joked about the Mexican vote. Talked about being born with a silver spoon in his mouth.


Umm, the really good consultants work in other countries, and the whole election is a game. Politics itself is a game, it's a game for adults. He's right, if he did put his wife out there too much people would get tired of her. His family is from Mexico, and everyone knows he was born rich.

No one who is undecided about who they will vote for will be swayed by that tape. Now they may like Romney a little less, but that is it. The election was over long before this tape came out.
 
2012-09-17 06:55:49 PM  

WTF Indeed: mrshowrules: Did you watch all the segments? He talks about using consultants who worked in various other countries and basically how the whole election is just a game. He talks about not wanting to use his wife to often because the public would get tired of her. As if he wasn't already having problems with the women's vote. He joked about the Mexican vote. Talked about being born with a silver spoon in his mouth.

Umm, the really good consultants work in other countries, and the whole election is a game. Politics itself is a game, it's a game for adults. He's right, if he did put his wife out there too much people would get tired of her. His family is from Mexico, and everyone knows he was born rich.

No one who is undecided about who they will vote for will be swayed by that tape. Now they may like Romney a little less, but that is it. The election was over long before this tape came out.


I'm not saying he isn't being honest. He's being refreshing honest about not really giving a shiat about anything but winning. My point is that he is now going to lose by a landslide and I guess we also have to ask ourselves how this will effect Congress/Senate races. Obama now has moral highground is asking the American public to give him a Congress/Senate he can work with. At least that is what I would do.
 
2012-09-17 07:01:03 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: So is Anson a place and are you actually dancin' there?


Yeah. The handle comes from this book. While you guys here think I'm a right wing conservative because of my fiscal views and distrust of a distant authority most around here think I'm a left wing hippy because of my social views on religion, abortion, gay marriage and legalization. Where the conventional wisdom used to be NO dancin' in Anson, I would have been (the book was about events that occurred about 10 years before I moved here) dancin' my heart out.
 
2012-09-17 07:06:59 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: impaler: What do you think we're doing?

Creating a dependency class that come to EXPECT..."help" regardless of ability to pull themselves out otherwise.

[csb]

Local lady was offered a promotion within her place of employment. This promotion brought with it supervisory duties, more responsibilities, opportunities for further advancement, FREE training to further these opportunities and most importantly a substantial raise. Exactly the way it's supposed to work right? She turned it down because she would lose her benefits...and not the ones she already has with her employer. THAT is some farked up shiat right there and is what takes away from those that really NEED it.
[/csb]


Does anyone actually believe this story?
 
2012-09-17 07:07:18 PM  

mrshowrules: I'm not saying he isn't being honest. He's being refreshing honest about not really giving a shiat about anything but winning. My point is that he is now going to lose by a landslide and I guess we also have to ask ourselves how this will effect Congress/Senate races. Obama now has moral highground is asking the American public to give him a Congress/Senate he can work with. At least that is what I would do.


If you think Obama will win in a landslide because of this tape you are delusional, and if you think this will effect down ticket races you're just being stupid. The only way this race effects downticket races is if conservatives and wacko independents stay home on election day because they despise Mitt Romney, and what about this tape would make them despise Mitt Romney exactly?
 
2012-09-17 07:22:14 PM  

WTF Indeed: mrshowrules: I'm not saying he isn't being honest. He's being refreshing honest about not really giving a shiat about anything but winning. My point is that he is now going to lose by a landslide and I guess we also have to ask ourselves how this will effect Congress/Senate races. Obama now has moral highground is asking the American public to give him a Congress/Senate he can work with. At least that is what I would do.

If you think Obama will win in a landslide because of this tape you are delusional, and if you think this will effect down ticket races you're just being stupid. The only way this race effects downticket races is if conservatives and wacko independents stay home on election day because they despise Mitt Romney, and what about this tape would make them despise Mitt Romney exactly?


I'm saying Obama now even has a shot at Texas. I'm talking the whole video not just the 47% crack. It makes Republicans stay home, it energizes Obama's base and quite possibly allows the DNC to hold on to the Senate which is very tight. Wait until the seniors clue in to what Romney just said. wait until Romney makes things much worse but playing the victim on this tomorrow. Wait until Obama uses it to ask for Romney's tax returns again. This will be the gift that keeps on giving.

You think I'm being stupid. Will see.
 
2012-09-17 07:27:11 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: impaler: What do you think we're doing?

Creating a dependency class that come to EXPECT..."help" regardless of ability to pull themselves out otherwise.

[csb]

Local lady was offered a promotion within her place of employment. This promotion brought with it supervisory duties, more responsibilities, opportunities for further advancement, FREE training to further these opportunities and most importantly a substantial raise. Exactly the way it's supposed to work right? She turned it down because she would lose her benefits...and not the ones she already has with her employer. THAT is some farked up shiat right there and is what takes away from those that really NEED it.
[/csb]


And that may happen once in a while, but realistically, it's not going to be often. Most of the people who are receiving benefits are not going to turn down an opportunity to make more money, etc, just to keep benefits. Most of them aren't likely to get that opportunity, sadly. Cases like this one are probably extremely rare.

Of course in any benefit system there is going to be some fraud, and some waste, and some abuse. I don't think there's any way around it. But let's not make the perfect the enemy of the good here - the vast majority of people taking benefits aren't one job interview away from the middle class. I'm willing to pay the price to help these folks keep their heads above water, even if I'm also paying for a few jerks who are gaming the system.

And let's also remember that the social safety net is good for those of us who will never need it. To some extent, it's a social stability program as well. Desperate and poor people sometimes do desperate things. Helping to keep them at least fed and sheltered keeps those things from happening. During the era of the New Deal, the desperate and crazy things were communism and fascism, which are probably not as big of a danger today, but as the riots 20 years ago in my city showed, it doesn't take much to set people off, and it's damn hard to stop them once they've started.
 
2012-09-17 07:28:19 PM  
What a massive dick.
 
2012-09-17 07:28:37 PM  
Romney told the contributors that "women are open to supporting me," but that "we are having a much harder time with Hispanic voters, and if the Hispanic voting bloc becomes as committed to the Democrats as the African American voting block has in the past, why, we're in trouble as a party and, I think, as a nation."

That's some choice racism right there that is.
 
2012-09-17 07:28:53 PM  
www.naturalhealth365.com
Look how smug and entitled this women is!!!! When rich people are paying up to 14% in taxes!!! How can we let this stand!!! She needs to pay more so the rich can pay less!!!
 
2012-09-17 07:29:22 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?


Yes.
 
2012-09-17 07:30:46 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Blues_X: Yes.

But...


Aarontology: Yeah, those soldiers and veterans need to shut the f*ck up

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: And old people and children

ManateeGag: yeah, fark those people who want food and shelter!

Those three statements seem to suggest that soldiers, old people, children and people who want food and shelter are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Which is it?


A false dichotomy from a powerfully dishonest person.
 
2012-09-17 07:31:50 PM  
Damn, I thought this was going to be something about Romney bashing his backwards, racist, southern white base. He's just saying what we all know Republican voters think about Obama voters. Not a big deal.
 
2012-09-17 07:32:09 PM  
Don't worry, we'll outlaw blasphemy against islam and all of those victims will finally see justice done.
 
2012-09-17 07:32:18 PM  

mrshowrules: I'm saying Obama now even has a shot at Texas. I'm talking the whole video not just the 47% crack. It makes Republicans stay home, it energizes Obama's base and quite possibly allows the DNC to hold on to the Senate which is very tight. Wait until the seniors clue in to what Romney just said. wait until Romney makes things much worse but playing the victim on this tomorrow. Wait until Obama uses it to ask for Romney's tax returns again. This will be the gift that keeps on giving.

You think I'm being stupid. Will see


There are two things most people who talk politics like you lack, scope and context. Those are two things you are a missing here.
 
2012-09-17 07:32:23 PM  
Unforced error 1,776

/patriot!
 
2012-09-17 07:32:25 PM  

mrshowrules: Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?

Yes it is. He said 47%. 47% might want access to affordable health care insurance and employment. The number of people as a percentage that want a free ride, would in theory be at least less than the unemployment rate or do you assume all people who can't find work are lazy?


You know DIA does in fact believe that anyone who is on any form of government relief is a lazy leech who has no desire to do anything but lay around and be waited on. You know, all those people on unemployment who need to get out there and find a job that doesn't exist so they can get off the government tit.
 
2012-09-17 07:32:51 PM  
Tomorrow, Mitt will come out and say he was misquoted, he believes that anyone who makes less than the $250,000 middle class minimum should just die.
 
2012-09-17 07:32:52 PM  
Romney becomes more of an idiot every day.
 
2012-09-17 07:33:22 PM  
Hey can we start with these people who "pay no taxes first"?

As of 2009, more than 20,000 filers making more than $200,000 a year - 1,470 of whom had adjusted gross income of more than $1 million - owed no income tax, a Detroit Free Press analysis showed.

Can we start with them and the corporation who pay no taxes? Or is that different?
 
2012-09-17 07:33:52 PM  
The things he said, I thought they were facts. Why are Democrats suddenly so afraid of facts?
 
2012-09-17 07:34:30 PM  
Well, now we really need to see Mitt Romney's tax returns.
 
2012-09-17 07:34:39 PM  

Bloody William: Fundamental ideological differences: Liberals fear something bad will happen to someone who doesn't deserve it. Conservatives fear something good will happen to someone who doesn't deserve it.


I'm stealing this. Will credit.
 
2012-09-17 07:34:41 PM  

beta_plus: Don't worry, we'll outlaw blasphemy against islam and all of those victims will finally see justice done.


OMG Romney did something dumb again. THREAD SHIAT TIME!!!
 
2012-09-17 07:35:33 PM  
Fun fact about where those moochers all live -

taxfoundation.org
 
2012-09-17 07:35:36 PM  

Cletus C.: The things he said, I thought they were facts. Why are Democrats suddenly so afraid of facts?


That people bankrupt because they have medical bills because they are dying of cancer we should tax them more and throw them on the street? You agree with that?
 
2012-09-17 07:36:03 PM  

ravenlore: Bloody William: Fundamental ideological differences: Liberals fear something bad will happen to someone who doesn't deserve it. Conservatives fear something good will happen to someone who doesn't deserve it.

I'm stealing this. Will credit.


"Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear." - William E. Gladstone
 
2012-09-17 07:36:18 PM  
In any sane world this statement would be at the top of the news. It will get swept under, except for some cable outlets that will host talking heads to debate whether 47% of the population are lazy, over-entitled bums.
 
2012-09-17 07:36:19 PM  
Holy fark shiat, Romney is REALLY REALLY bad at this. Obama doesn't have to paint a charicature of Romney, Romney is a walking, talking charicature.
 
2012-09-17 07:36:20 PM  
Have we ever had a major presidential candidate so completely clueless about the lives of the vast majority of Americans? Even G. W. Bush was a paragon of self-awareness and humility next to Romney.
 
2012-09-17 07:37:12 PM  
In this thread:

"It's an entitlement! Well, until it benefits me, then it's a necessity that we deserve!"
 
2012-09-17 07:37:17 PM  
What entitled "people" who pay no income tax may look like:

ionenewsone.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-09-17 07:37:45 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?


Rich people are "sociopathic assholes" who "only care about money" and would "screw over 1,000 people to make $1 more".

Is this an inaccurate statement?
 
2012-09-17 07:37:45 PM  
This damn well better be plastered over every news cast, and broadcast during every commercial break in every state for the next 2 months
 
2012-09-17 07:37:47 PM  
This may just change my vote. He'd have it locked up if he was this honest publicly, but at least he speaks the open and honest truth at some point in time...

If he says this in a public speech I'll be all his.
 
2012-09-17 07:39:13 PM  

Corvus: Cletus C.: The things he said, I thought they were facts. Why are Democrats suddenly so afraid of facts?

That people bankrupt because they have medical bills because they are dying of cancer we should tax them more and throw them on the street? You agree with that?


Are you the same person who created the ad where Romney killed the laid off worker's wife?
 
2012-09-17 07:39:57 PM  

Lost Thought 00: This damn well better be plastered over every news cast, and broadcast during every commercial break in every state for the next 2 months


And if it's not, anyone who bleats on about the liberal media is a tard.
 
2012-09-17 07:39:57 PM  

Corvus: What entitled "people" who pay no income tax may look like:

[ionenewsone.files.wordpress.com image 452x693]


Taxing corporations does not work. They do one of 3 things:
1) raise prices
2) cut dividends
3) fire workers


They will always pass the cost onto someone else.
This is not because they are evil. They are at a different point on the chain of production and consumption.

Try taking some basic non-Keynesian Macro Economics so you don't sound like an idiot.
 
2012-09-17 07:40:43 PM  
Okay, now I am convinced they are intentionally trying to blow the election.
 
2012-09-17 07:40:50 PM  
Also, yes I think human beings are entitled to housing and food. No, the rare person that is genuinely lazy as opposed to the many who toil in poverty or near poverty doesn't change that. Yes, the lazy person deserves food too, being that Jesus taught me to care for my fellow man without any stipulation - and really any decent set of ethics, whether based on religious background or not, would say the same thing.
 
2012-09-17 07:40:55 PM  

Cletus C.: Corvus: Cletus C.: The things he said, I thought they were facts. Why are Democrats suddenly so afraid of facts?

That people bankrupt because they have medical bills because they are dying of cancer we should tax them more and throw them on the street? You agree with that?

Are you the same person who created the ad where Romney killed the laid off worker's wife?


I am asking you a question. Is that person "entitled" to their medical care? Yes or No? Romney was implying they should pay more in taxes and if they can't afford it should be thrown on the streets. Is that not right?


If I am saying something which he disagress tell me.
 
2012-09-17 07:41:03 PM  

Lost Thought 00: This damn well better be plastered over every news cast, and broadcast during every commercial break in every state for the next 2 months


Don't worry, the outrage expressed here will suffice. Always has. Always will.
 
2012-09-17 07:41:09 PM  
I'm just glad someone has this on tape.

I mean other than all the tape that exists from fox news or daily talk radio.

I guess from closed doors and hushed quite rooms it means more to people than being screamed at the top of someone's lungs.
 
2012-09-17 07:41:12 PM  
What an Obama-voting freeloader might look like:

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-09-17 07:41:20 PM  
Wow, it's even worse listening to it than it looks on paper. He actually put Emphasis on the "Entitled to Food and Housing" part. Wow. He's royally f*cked. Want to bet he does a thorough sweep for all recording devices before all fundraisers from now on? Not that it will matter, this just lost him every independent he hadn't already alienated
 
2012-09-17 07:41:36 PM  

beta_plus: Corvus: What entitled "people" who pay no income tax may look like:

[ionenewsone.files.wordpress.com image 452x693]

Taxing corporations does not work. They do one of 3 things:
1) raise prices
2) cut dividends
3) fire workers


They will always pass the cost onto someone else.
This is not because they are evil. They are at a different point on the chain of production and consumption.

Try taking some basic non-Keynesian Macro Economics so you don't sound like an idiot.


Why, it didn't work for you.
 
2012-09-17 07:41:39 PM  

Nabb1: But no one has a right to demand the government provide them anything.


Baloney. Just as an example, American citizens have every right to demand the government provide those things the Constitution spells out as the government's responsibility to provide.
 
2012-09-17 07:42:24 PM  

beta_plus: They will always pass the cost onto someone else.
This is not because they are evil. They are at a different point on the chain of production and consumption.


Fine then why are you against it then? If they just pass it on to consumers then it's no problem to tax them because it would not hurt their profits at all would it?
 
2012-09-17 07:43:07 PM  

Corvus: Cletus C.: Corvus: Cletus C.: The things he said, I thought they were facts. Why are Democrats suddenly so afraid of facts?

That people bankrupt because they have medical bills because they are dying of cancer we should tax them more and throw them on the street? You agree with that?

Are you the same person who created the ad where Romney killed the laid off worker's wife?

I am asking you a question. Is that person "entitled" to their medical care? Yes or No? Romney was implying they should pay more in taxes and if they can't afford it should be thrown on the streets. Is that not right?


If I am saying something which he disagress tell me.


Is what he said not enough for you? You need to apply your own twisted implications.

All the other libs managed to pee themselves over what was presented. Why are you so special?
 
2012-09-17 07:43:55 PM  

beta_plus: Taxing corporations does not work. They do one of 3 things:
1) raise prices
2) cut dividends
3) fire workers


They will always pass the cost onto someone else.


How is them "cutting dividends" "not working" that is taking the money out of their profits.
 
2012-09-17 07:44:08 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Aarontology: "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Yeah, those soldiers and veterans need to shut the f*ck up.

And old people and children.


Screw those whiners who don't want to die when they get sick. Or starve or freeze to death. Damn babies.
 
2012-09-17 07:44:30 PM  

Cletus C.: Corvus: Cletus C.: Corvus: Cletus C.: The things he said, I thought they were facts. Why are Democrats suddenly so afraid of facts?

That people bankrupt because they have medical bills because they are dying of cancer we should tax them more and throw them on the street? You agree with that?

Are you the same person who created the ad where Romney killed the laid off worker's wife?

I am asking you a question. Is that person "entitled" to their medical care? Yes or No? Romney was implying they should pay more in taxes and if they can't afford it should be thrown on the streets. Is that not right?


If I am saying something which he disagress tell me.

Is what he said not enough for you? You need to apply your own twisted implications.

All the other libs managed to pee themselves over what was presented. Why are you so special?


Sorry what part was I wrong with? please explain.
 
2012-09-17 07:44:53 PM  
So, if Romney doesn't consider access to food and shelter a basic human right, what exactly do all those charities he claims to donate to actually provide?
 
2012-09-17 07:46:08 PM  

Lost Thought 00: So, if Romney doesn't consider access to food and shelter a basic human right, what exactly do all those charities he claims to donate to actually provide?


Blocking gay marriage, and spreading their religion around the world. That's what his church does which he likes to call "charity".
 
2012-09-17 07:46:16 PM  

Smelly McUgly: Also, yes I think human beings are entitled to housing and food. No, the rare person that is genuinely lazy as opposed to the many who toil in poverty or near poverty doesn't change that. Yes, the lazy person deserves food too, being that Jesus taught me to care for my fellow man without any stipulation - and really any decent set of ethics, whether based on religious background or not, would say the same thing.


Let's also not fall into the trap of assuming that all genuinely lazy people are receiving entitlements. I've carved out a nice career over 15 years of spending 60% of my working hours on Fark.com and other online distractions, and 20% in the bathroom. My seniority affords me the cube on the back corner of my office and I can see everyone's monitor, so I know I'm not alone.
 
2012-09-17 07:46:29 PM  

Lost Thought 00: So, if Romney doesn't consider access to food and shelter a basic human right, what exactly do all those charities he claims to donate to actually provide?


Money to run ads in support of unconstitutional laws that meddle with the lives of gay folks, duh.
 
2012-09-17 07:47:34 PM  

Cletus C.: Corvus: Cletus C.: Corvus: Cletus C.: The things he said, I thought they were facts. Why are Democrats suddenly so afraid of facts?

That people bankrupt because they have medical bills because they are dying of cancer we should tax them more and throw them on the street? You agree with that?

Are you the same person who created the ad where Romney killed the laid off worker's wife?

I am asking you a question. Is that person "entitled" to their medical care? Yes or No? Romney was implying they should pay more in taxes and if they can't afford it should be thrown on the streets. Is that not right?


If I am saying something which he disagress tell me.

Is what he said not enough for you? You need to apply your own twisted implications.

All the other libs managed to pee themselves over what was presented. Why are you so special?


What "twisted implications"? Is someone bankrupt from cancer care not one of these people he is talking about with such disdain?

 
2012-09-17 07:48:03 PM  
Obama campaign's Weeners - "It's hard to serve as president for all Americans when you've disdainfully written off half the nation."
 
2012-09-17 07:48:21 PM  

Bloody William: Nabb1: "A government that has the power to give you something has the power to take it away." - Thomas Jefferson. If you can provide yourself with the necessities in life, you have no right to demand others do so for you.

"The poor who have neither property, friends, nor strength to
labor, are boarded in the houses of good farmers, to whom a
stipulated sum is annually paid. To those who are able to help
themselves a little, or have friends from whom they derive some
succor, inadequate however to their full maintenance,
supplementary aids are given which enable them to live
comfortably in their own houses, or in the houses of their
friends."

-Thomas Jefferson. Notes on Virginia, 1782.


Need a picture of Jefferson saying "OH, SNAP!".
 
2012-09-17 07:49:51 PM  
Look, I don't like defending Romney, but I don't really see the big deal about this. He's a candidate running an election with an extremely polarised populace. Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.

You really think that the Obama campaign doesn't think that a good portion of Romney's base is a bunch of racist whackjobs, either?
 
2012-09-17 07:49:56 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: "There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what," Romney says in one clip. "All right -- there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent on government, who believe that, that they are victims, who believe that government has the responsibility to care for them. Who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing."

I am part of the 47% and I am not dependent on the government for anything besides roads, public schools, fire department, police etc.

I don't need housing, food or health care provided from the government.

Does Romney truly believe that EVERYONE who votes for Obama is on the dole?


To be fair the Republican idea of the dole includes teachers, firefighters government workers(accept elected Republicans) union memeers and especially people who worked for the government and now are collecting pensions.
 
2012-09-17 07:50:11 PM  
I think we all know Romney does not give one flying fark about me or you but to hear it spoken out loud like that is still a little jarring.
 
2012-09-17 07:50:24 PM  

Silly Jesus: This may just change my vote. He'd have it locked up if he was this honest publicly, but at least he speaks the open and honest truthprejudice at some point in time...

If he says this in a public speech I'll be all his.

 
2012-09-17 07:51:02 PM  
Funny thing is the vast majority of people I know who are voting Romney are actually dependent on the government.

/the olds
//well older than me
 
2012-09-17 07:51:22 PM  
I wouldn't say it's over at all. Republicans have some supernatural ability to ignore the bad and somehow either shift the debate so that what was bad isn't so terrible anymore, or they manage to make people forget these things/file them under "politics as usual" with unnatural speed.

But, this DOES obliterate any progress they might have made with those "Tired of Obama's empty promises? Vote Romney" ads.
 
2012-09-17 07:51:49 PM  

spongeboob: To be fair the Republican idea of the dole includes teachers, firefighters government workers(accept elected Republicans) union memeers and especially people who worked for the government and now are collecting pensions.


But magically not Republicans who work for the government. They have magic boot straps!
 
2012-09-17 07:52:29 PM  

GhostFish: RexTalionis: Look, I don't like defending Romney, but I don't really see the big deal about this. He's a candidate running an election with an extremely polarised populace. Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.

You really think that the Obama campaign doesn't think that a good portion of Romney's base is a bunch of racist whackjobs, either?

This would be like Obama coming out and saying that everyone voting against him is a racist whackjob.


Okay, Obama knows better than saying that, even in private. But you can't tell me that a good number of liberals aren't thinking that exact thought.
 
2012-09-17 07:53:09 PM  
Dancin_in_Anson reminds me of Romney himself in a lot of ways. He talks an awful lot, but you really have very little idea what he stands for or what point he's trying to make most of the time.
 
2012-09-17 07:53:18 PM  

RexTalionis: GhostFish: RexTalionis: Look, I don't like defending Romney, but I don't really see the big deal about this. He's a candidate running an election with an extremely polarised populace. Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.

You really think that the Obama campaign doesn't think that a good portion of Romney's base is a bunch of racist whackjobs, either?

This would be like Obama coming out and saying that everyone voting against him is a racist whackjob.

Okay, Obama knows better than saying that, even in private. But you can't tell me that a good number of liberals aren't thinking that exact thought.


I can tell you no one thinks 47% of the country is racist
 
2012-09-17 07:53:26 PM  

Zoophagous: Funny thing is the vast majority of people I know who are voting Romney are actually dependent on the government.

/the olds
//well older than me


Did you see that poll where the asked people on government programs if they were on government programs and about 50% said they weren't? Republicans think it's different when they are on government programs and it doesn't count.
 
2012-09-17 07:53:26 PM  
Sounds like dogwhistling.
But then again, he's a Bishop,
so he's only spitting church doctrine
... as a dogwhistle.
 
2012-09-17 07:54:02 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Bloody William: It assumes that those three things are readily available

They are.


As I'm done being civil with you idiots; go stick your head in a donkey's ass, you cock. We'll fix it without you, like we always do.
 
2012-09-17 07:54:06 PM  

beta_plus: Taxing corporations does not work


Giving corporations tax breaks does not work either, particularly because they proceed to do everything BUT spending the money in a way that would even transiently be beneficial to their country or countrymen.

RexTalionis: Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.


The Republicans have been trying to convince the few Democrats on shaky grounds (at least, re: Obama) to come over to their side. This shiats all over that idea.
 
2012-09-17 07:54:50 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Aarontology: "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Yeah, those soldiers and veterans need to shut the f*ck up.

And old people and children.


And the people working for a non- living wage, like many of the companies which made Rmoney wealthy
 
2012-09-17 07:55:07 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: How about you take care of yourself FIRST, then look to help others?


i.imgur.com 

Just doing what the main said here.
 
2012-09-17 07:55:09 PM  

Lost Thought 00: So, if Romney doesn't consider access to food and shelter a basic human right, what exactly do all those charities he claims to donate to actually provide?


It's mostly just one charity. It provides: Funding for young Mormons who go out and pester people in an attempt to get them to become Mormon. Also presumably new temples, and of course donations to anti gay marriage campaigns in other states.
 
2012-09-17 07:56:10 PM  

RexTalionis: GhostFish: RexTalionis: Look, I don't like defending Romney, but I don't really see the big deal about this. He's a candidate running an election with an extremely polarised populace. Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.

You really think that the Obama campaign doesn't think that a good portion of Romney's base is a bunch of racist whackjobs, either?

This would be like Obama coming out and saying that everyone voting against him is a racist whackjob.

Okay, Obama knows better than saying that, even in private. But you can't tell me that a good number of liberals aren't thinking that exact thought.


Good point Romney said something stupid but lets not ignore a completely hypothetical thing we can make up and blame liberals for.

Serious, stop the trying to pass blame around when the other side didn't even do anything.
 
2012-09-17 07:56:32 PM  
"believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Aren't those the very foundation of the hierarchy of human needs?
 
2012-09-17 07:56:59 PM  
The trouble I'm seeing, especially with DIA, is this Rush Limbaugh interpretation of the word "entitlement." Entitlement, by definition, refers to something that you're entitled to.

I work forty hour weeks, and I'm therefore "entitled" to the wage and benefits that my employers and I negotiated in good faith. If the job goes away, I'm entitled to unemployment compensation. When I hit retirement age, I'll be entitled to a share of what I paid into social security and Medicare.

Yet implicit in the way conservatives wield the word "entitlement" is the idea that these are things that we're not actually entitled to - even if we've worked for them all our lives. So we reach a point where we're not only not entitled to the economic benefits of a forward-thinking free society, we're not even entitled to things we've actually sacrificed for. They seem to imply that EVEN IF you work forty hour weeks, you're still not entitled to food, shelter, or safety.

The reason I vote liberal is because I want to defend the system that gave me those opportunities - partly because I want to make sure that others have those opportunities, and partly because if my own situation goes south, I want the same level of opportunity to rebuild that I had when I created this situation. Unfortunately, this positions me perfectly for an opportunistic conservative to come along and set me tooth-and-claw against my neighbor. "See what you want? You'll have to fight him to get it. See what you've earned? You'll have to fight him to keep it." This must all be very entertaining for the Romneys of the world, throwing morsels to the plebians and watching them destroy each other for a bite.

I want to ask DIA what it would take for me to be entitled to food, shelter, and safety. At what point do you think I've put in enough of a stake in society for that to be my due? Does it involve a tax bracket, or a certain number of hours worked, or a level of commitment to a conservative cause? At what point am I actually entitled to my entitlements?
 
2012-09-17 07:57:07 PM  

beta_plus: Corvus: What entitled "people" who pay no income tax may look like:

[ionenewsone.files.wordpress.com image 452x693]

Taxing corporations does not work. They do one of 3 things:
1) raise prices
2) cut dividends
3) fire workers


They will always pass the cost onto someone else.
This is not because they are evil. They are at a different point on the chain of production and consumption.

Try taking some basic non-Keynesian Macro Economics so you don't sound like an idiot.


Speaking of sounding like an idiot, the assertion that you made in the first part of your statement is micro economics.

Also if you took an accredited course in micro economics you would know that taxes are not fully passed on to the customer and typically shared between producer and consumer. The other two of your absolutes are not. Corporate taxes are do not effect hiring as employees are an expense and drive down profits therefore owed taxes. If you fire some one because of increased taxes you increase your taxable earnings. that is just poor management.
 
2012-09-17 07:57:14 PM  
FTA: "[M]y job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives," Romney also said in the video, according to Mother Jones.

Mitt Romney is an idiot for making a speech that is thinly disgused racism who never thought he could be recorded.

Who needs this scary man as President? He only cares about rich, white people.
 
2012-09-17 07:57:44 PM  
In a way, I'd have a lot more respect for Rmoney and rAyn if they'd just openly call for the abolition of all government social-welfare policies, including Social Security and Medicare. They'd never get elected, but at least they'd be coherent.
 
2012-09-17 07:58:06 PM  

Strix occidentalis: "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Aren't those the very foundation of the hierarchy of human needs?


Yes they are. So you can make the point (and I know many have) that without having a base of those all other freedoms can't exist.
 
2012-09-17 07:58:24 PM  
DIA going into maximum obtuseness mode.
 
2012-09-17 07:58:25 PM  

RexTalionis: Look, I don't like defending Romney, but I don't really see the big deal about this. He's a candidate running an election with an extremely polarised populace. Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.

You really think that the Obama campaign doesn't think that a good portion of Romney's base is a bunch of racist whackjobs, either?


Ya, but Obama is hopefully not going to be stupid enough to say that two months before the election.
 
2012-09-17 07:58:46 PM  
Clownfrauds.
 
2012-09-17 07:59:19 PM  

Mad Tea Party: DIA going into maximum obtuseness mode.


Automatic Self-defense mechanism. He has no conscious control over it
 
2012-09-17 07:59:28 PM  

Pincy: RexTalionis: Look, I don't like defending Romney, but I don't really see the big deal about this. He's a candidate running an election with an extremely polarised populace. Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.

You really think that the Obama campaign doesn't think that a good portion of Romney's base is a bunch of racist whackjobs, either?

Ya, but Obama is hopefully not going to be stupid enough to say that two months before the election.


He doesn't believe it either.
 
2012-09-17 07:59:50 PM  

RexTalionis: Look, I don't like defending Romney, but I don't really see the big deal about this. He's a candidate running an election with an extremely polarised populace. Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.

You really think that the Obama campaign doesn't think that a good portion of Romney's base is a bunch of racist whackjobs, either?


If Obama does he is smart enough to not talk about it semi-publicly, though his 2008 comment came close.
 
2012-09-17 08:00:13 PM  
Sure, those people who support Obama, who vote for democrats, who live in blue states, which give more to the federal government than they get back, those people Mitt?
 
2012-09-17 08:01:01 PM  

Corvus: Pincy: RexTalionis: Look, I don't like defending Romney, but I don't really see the big deal about this. He's a candidate running an election with an extremely polarised populace. Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.

You really think that the Obama campaign doesn't think that a good portion of Romney's base is a bunch of racist whackjobs, either?

Ya, but Obama is hopefully not going to be stupid enough to say that two months before the election.

He doesn't believe it either.


Ya, I meant to preface that with "even if he did.."
 
2012-09-17 08:01:42 PM  
With Romney's numbers stagnant and the election only 7 weeks away, this is the last thing he needed. And he knows it.
 
2012-09-17 08:02:09 PM  

Corvus: RexTalionis: GhostFish: RexTalionis: Look, I don't like defending Romney, but I don't really see the big deal about this. He's a candidate running an election with an extremely polarised populace. Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.

You really think that the Obama campaign doesn't think that a good portion of Romney's base is a bunch of racist whackjobs, either?

This would be like Obama coming out and saying that everyone voting against him is a racist whackjob.

Okay, Obama knows better than saying that, even in private. But you can't tell me that a good number of liberals aren't thinking that exact thought.

Good point Romney said something stupid but lets not ignore a completely hypothetical thing we can make up and blame liberals for.

Serious, stop the trying to pass blame around when the other side didn't even do anything.


Look. I think if you look at what I've said of politics in the last year, you would see that I am an Obama supporter. Frankly, you're probably the first one to accuse me of being a Romney fan.

I'm not saying that I agreed with what Romney said. I'm saying it's really not that big of a deal but for the political hay being made of this.
 
2012-09-17 08:02:21 PM  

RexTalionis: Look , I don't like defending Romney, but I don't really see the big deal about this. He's a candidate running an election with an extremely polarised populace. Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.

You really think that the Obama campaign doesn't think that a good portion of Romney's base is a bunch of racist whackjobs, either?


The Obama campaign has never pulled down its pants and taken a massive, directly-targeted shiat all over 47% percent of voters, which Romney explicitly mentioned by name.
 
2012-09-17 08:02:41 PM  

Paul Baumer: Fun fact about where those moochers all live -

[taxfoundation.org image 800x590]



BWAHAHAHAHA!

I am curious as to why Alaska has such a remarkably lower percentage (21%) than even the second least-moochiest state, Massachusetts (27%).
 
2012-09-17 08:02:56 PM  

Corvus: Fine then why are you against it then? If they just pass it on to consumers then it's no problem to tax them because it would not hurt their profits at all would it?


Well, because it is bollocks. Companies don't sit around saying "we could raise prices and stay competitive, but will we forgo those extra profits", and then suddenly when taxed change their minds. Taxes on profit have no direct impact on their costs, and so have no impact on their optimal pricing strategy. Taxes on inputs (raw materials, labor, etc.) will raise their costs and if it applies to their competition as well then a general rise in prices will tend to happen across the board, but based on their goods' price elasticities they will have to eat some of the rise in their costs and reduce their profits. So taxing companies is always going to redistribute money from the company to the general public (unless the tax is specifically earmarked for some purpose), although not always very efficiently, it depends on the market in question, and what sort of taxation is being discussed.
 
2012-09-17 08:02:57 PM  

Pincy: Corvus: Pincy: RexTalionis: Look, I don't like defending Romney, but I don't really see the big deal about this. He's a candidate running an election with an extremely polarised populace. Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.

You really think that the Obama campaign doesn't think that a good portion of Romney's base is a bunch of racist whackjobs, either?

Ya, but Obama is hopefully not going to be stupid enough to say that two months before the election.

He doesn't believe it either.

Ya, I meant to preface that with "even if he did.."


They are trying to turn this into a "both sides are just as bad" by creating BS hypotheticals that were never done and get off the subject of what Romney actually said.
 
2012-09-17 08:03:04 PM  
Today, Mitt Romney lost the election. Bloomberg write up of this.

On the tape, Romney explains that his electoral strategy involves writing off nearly half the country as unmoveable Obama voters. As Romney explains, 47 percent of Americans "believe that they are victims." He laments: "I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

So what's the upshot? "My job is not to worry about those people," he says. He also notes, describing President Obama's base, "These are people who pay no income tax. Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax."

This is an utter disaster for Romney.

Romney already has trouble relating to the public and convincing people he cares about them. Now, he's been caught on video saying that nearly half the country consists of hopeless losers.

Romney has been vigorously denying President Obama's claims that his tax plan would raise taxes on the middle class. Now, he's been caught on video suggesting that low- and middle-income Americans are undertaxed.

(That one is especially problematic given the speculation about what's on Mitt's unreleased pre-2010 tax returns.)
 
2012-09-17 08:03:29 PM  

peasandcarrots: I want to ask DIA what it would take for me to be entitled to food, shelter, and safety. At what point do you think I've put in enough of a stake in society for that to be my due? Does it involve a tax bracket, or a certain number of hours worked, or a level of commitment to a conservative cause? At what point am I actually entitled to my entitlements?


The answer is simple: Money.
That is what they value above all else. Greed is good. Money is moral.
 
2012-09-17 08:04:24 PM  

Corvus: spongeboob: To be fair the Republican idea of the dole includes teachers, firefighters government workers(accept elected Republicans) union members and especially people who worked for the government and now are collecting pensions.
But magically not Republicans who work for the government. They have magic boot straps!


No Republicans who work for the government are fighting the good fight, they are not like those other freeloaders, and probably get bonus points for "starving the beast"
 
2012-09-17 08:05:11 PM  
This is currently the lead story on Anderson Cooper 360
 
2012-09-17 08:05:13 PM  

RexTalionis: I'm not saying that I agreed with what Romney said. I'm saying it's really not that big of a deal but for the political hay being made of this


Your concern is noted. I'm not sure why we need to attribute hypothetical quotes no one actually said.

If you don't find it to be a big deal either way, like you said, no one is forcing you to comment in this thread.
 
2012-09-17 08:05:25 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: How about you take care of yourself FIRST, then look to help others?

Ah, that's why Romney hasn't yet. He's busy helping himself to government largess. When he's done, he'll let others get a turn.
 
2012-09-17 08:05:37 PM  
Would that be the same government that bailed out Bain & Company?
 
2012-09-17 08:05:38 PM  
So nearly half of all Americans rely on the government and won't take responsibility for their lives? And people only vote for Obama because they want free handouts?And we're still spreading the meme that nearly half the country doesn't pay income taxes?

What the farking fark, republicans?
 
2012-09-17 08:06:16 PM  
It's one thing for propaganda parrots to squawk this grotesque horseshiat about how everyone struggling to get by are goddamn parasites, but to have an actual candidate call 47% of americans parasites is obscene.

That someone could be that viciously, smugly, arrogantly oblivious to the struggles of people who work at the kind of shiate jobs that I thank god I don't have to work at, disgusts me.

If you think the problem with America is minimum wage earners not paying enough income tax to go with their payroll, sales etc taxes, while Mitt Romney pays too much income tax than you disgust me as well.
 
2012-09-17 08:06:17 PM  

Nadie_AZ: Today, Mitt Romney lost the election. Bloomberg write up of this.


Wow, I don't think it's that bad. But it's another big stumble after many weeks of stumbling.
 
2012-09-17 08:06:19 PM  

Nadie_AZ: Today, Mitt Romney lost the election.


Now there's a headline that's gotten a lot of wear and tear over the last few weeks
 
2012-09-17 08:06:28 PM  
Fk him. It gets worse.
I think the worst part is his tone of voice.
Romney actually has PASSION in it...
but it's passion for this?

He dogwhistled against blacks -- and veterans and old people got caught in the crossfire.

Mother Jones video

Also, that anti-Obama 'Obama didn't keep his promises/fatcat bankers' ad before the Romney video is twice as long as the Romney video.... or do others get different videos beforehand?

Praise to the whistleblower who released these videos.
 
2012-09-17 08:06:39 PM  

sweetmelissa31: 99.999% of "humans" believe they are entitled to food and shelter.


This is about the 4th time now that I've seen a really simple, intelligent post that cut through a bunch of bullshiat, clicked on the profile and seen your picture come up (I'm terrible with names). Thought it was time to say a resounding "YOU ROCK!!"

/your fan club
 
2012-09-17 08:06:49 PM  
If I believe that people are "entitled to health care, to food, to housing" well, call me Jesus Christ.
 
2012-09-17 08:07:29 PM  
On the upside he sounded much more lifelike.

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-09-17 08:07:49 PM  

Apples01: This is currently the lead story on Anderson Cooper 360


Hardball did a new segment for their 7pm rerun.
 
2012-09-17 08:08:01 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: So nearly half of all Americans rely on the government and won't take responsibility for their lives? And people only vote for Obama because they want free handouts?And we're still spreading the meme that nearly half the country doesn't pay income taxes?

What the farking fark, republicans?


Relax Charlie, I've got an angle.

darkdimensions.ca
 
2012-09-17 08:08:13 PM  

AnEvilGuest: It's one thing for propaganda parrots to squawk this grotesque horseshiat about how everyone struggling to get by are goddamn parasites, but to have an actual candidate call 47% of americans parasites is obscene.

That someone could be that viciously, smugly, arrogantly oblivious to the struggles of people who work at the kind of shiate jobs that I thank god I don't have to work at, disgusts me.

If you think the problem with America is minimum wage earners not paying enough income tax to go with their payroll, sales etc taxes, while Mitt Romney pays too much income tax than you disgust me as well.


THIS THIS THIS.

If I was Obama admin I would be bringing out cancer victims, retirees, US vets and say screw you Romney we are going to protect these people and we are not victims!
 
2012-09-17 08:09:22 PM  
Wait wait wait.. there are people that need food, healthcare and housing and can't afford it? !

Fark you! That's only for people that have money. These "entitled" people need to starve and die.
 
2012-09-17 08:09:32 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: So nearly half of all Americans rely on the government and won't take responsibility for their lives? And people only vote for Obama because they want free handouts?And we're still spreading the meme that nearly half the country doesn't pay income taxes?

What the farking fark, republicans?


They are running out of gas and the uphill (debates) is coming up fast. Something something throwing anything that will stick.
 
2012-09-17 08:10:00 PM  
They are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is he saying that he will keep Health care, food and housing away from the people of the United States?

Good luck with that plan.
 
2012-09-17 08:10:51 PM  
One of the problems with Mitt is that he really believes that he pulled himself up by the bootstraps and wouldn't it be great if we returned America to those days. He's the type of guy who will deny benefits to the sick, the poor, the disabled--all as part of some grand moralistic social experiment that could only appeal to the casual rich.
 
2012-09-17 08:11:29 PM  
www.historyguy.com

Some people's government handouts are better than others.
 
2012-09-17 08:11:36 PM  

Nabb1: vartian: Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?

No. I believe peopled are entitled to those things. It is farking ludicrous to even entertain the thought that 47% of the country agrees with me.

No, they aren't. You're not entitled to anything else from anyone else. Providing for those who cannot provide for themselves is charity, and there's nothing wrong with helping people. But no one has a right to demand the government provide them anything. "A government that has the power to give you something has the power to take it away." - Thomas Jefferson. If you can provide yourself with the necessities in life, you have no right to demand others do so for you.


We've seen what happen when the government provides nothing for their citizens (Somalia) and when they provide too much for their citizens (Iraq right before the second US war).

Can we agree that a prudent government should aim for something in the middle? Provide enough to keep us from killing each other to feed our families, but not so much that we become lazy slobs with no initiative.
 
2012-09-17 08:12:07 PM  
This was probably the worst possible headline for something like this. I wish there were a more real headline and we'd have a massive thread where more people can farking watch this or at least read the transcript of this video. It's absolutely disgusting, sickening shiat.
 
2012-09-17 08:12:17 PM  
Holy shiat this is now the Google "Top Story" which means everyone is clicking it.
 
2012-09-17 08:12:23 PM  
Oh, and Romney doesn't believe he was born into privlege:

"I have inherited nothing." He remarked, "There is a perception, 'Oh, we were born with a silver spoon, he never had to earn anything and so forth.' Frankly, I was born with a silver spoon, which is the greatest gift you can have: which is to get born in America."
 
2012-09-17 08:12:55 PM  

Triumph: [www.historyguy.com image 500x333]

Some people's government handouts are better than others.


They got rich the Republican way, being born into it or marry it so it's ok.
 
2012-09-17 08:13:05 PM  
 
2012-09-17 08:13:36 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: Oh, and Romney doesn't believe he was born into privlege:

"I have inherited nothing." He remarked, "There is a perception, 'Oh, we were born with a silver spoon, he never had to earn anything and so forth.' Frankly, I was born with a silver spoon, which is the greatest gift you can have: which is to get born in America."


Right he was GIFTED stock and house but he didn't "inherit" it. So that makes it ok.
 
2012-09-17 08:13:42 PM  

peasandcarrots: I want to ask DIA what it would take for me to be entitled to food, shelter, and safety. At what point do you think I've put in enough of a stake in society for that to be my due? Does it involve a tax bracket, or a certain number of hours worked, or a level of commitment to a conservative cause? At what point am I actually entitled to my entitlements?


You're talking to a guy who thinks that active duty military aren't entitled to food, shelter, or medical care.
 
2012-09-17 08:14:09 PM  

beakerxf: when they provide too much for their citizens (Iraq right before the second US war)


Well, that's a new one. Usually people bring up England or Sweden or maybe even Communist Russia when making that example. I never would have picked pre-war Iraq as the example of Socialism gone too far
 
2012-09-17 08:14:21 PM  
CLASS WARFARE.
 
2012-09-17 08:15:19 PM  

RexTalionis: GhostFish: RexTalionis: Look, I don't like defending Romney, but I don't really see the big deal about this. He's a candidate running an election with an extremely polarised populace. Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.

You really think that the Obama campaign doesn't think that a good portion of Romney's base is a bunch of racist whackjobs, either?

This would be like Obama coming out and saying that everyone voting against him is a racist whackjob.

Okay, Obama knows better than saying that, even in private. But you can't tell me that a good number of liberals aren't thinking that exact thought.


Oh, I've been thinking it AND saying it here since at least 2010.

And yet people still deride the left as tolerant. I don't know how I've failed them so.
 
2012-09-17 08:16:03 PM  
I, namegoeshere, feel that I am entitled to affordable healthcare for myself and my family. I feel as a human being, that I should not have to go bankrupt because of a serious accident or illness. I should not have to choose between my retirement, my children's education, and death. Yes, you farking douchebag, I am entitled to that.
 
2012-09-17 08:17:41 PM  
So these are all those voters in the states that take more federal taxes and they give back, like Mississippi, Alabama and Texas?

Then of course, there are the folks that give more in federal taxes then they take back. State like New York and Connecticut.

So who is exactly is voting for Obama?
 
2012-09-17 08:18:35 PM  

Zoophagous: Funny thing is the vast majority of people I know who are voting Romney are actually dependent on the government.

/the olds
//well older than me


My (future) in-laws. Retired military with some niiiice federal benefits. Plus their daughter and her kids are on welfare and all that since she can't hold down a job (I certainly don't begrudge her kids getting benefits, not their fault their mom's an idiot). All of them are hardcore Teabaggin' birthers. Their son and I are quietly liberal since they'd probably disown us if they knew how we really feel. Yet if all government "entitlements" suddenly went away, they're the ones who'd be up shiat creek while we'd be doing just fine.
 
2012-09-17 08:18:58 PM  
cdn.theatlantic.com
 
2012-09-17 08:19:43 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?


No, I absolutely agree with it. I believe that america, the richest country in the world, can afford to provide food, housing, and health care to all citizens.

Mitt also knows we can easily afford it, but he has some sort of mental illness that demands that he grab as much as possible for himself.
 
2012-09-17 08:19:50 PM  

vartian: Nabb1:

No, they aren't. You're not entitled to anything else from anyone else. Providing for those who cannot provide for themselves is charity, and there's nothing wrong with helping people. But no one has a right to demand the government provide them anything. "A government that has the power to give you something has the power to take it away." - Thomas Jefferson. If you can provide yourself with the necessities in life, you have no right to demand others do so for you.

Look, make the "we're all in this alone" argument with me until you pass out, it will never farking sell with me. We are beholden to each other as a country and should provide a basic level of existence and support to our fellow citizens. Period.

You want me to value money over humanity, a proposition that would be humorous if it wasn't so damn sad.


Ah... What a succinctly satisfying biatch-slap. Let me just grab a cigarette and enjoy the hell of this one.
 
2012-09-17 08:19:56 PM  
My boyfriend and I are part of the 47% that will be voting for Obama again this year (though I believe more than 47% of the electorate will be voting for him), and neither one of us are on welfare, take any other kind of government benefits, or are layabouts.

RexTalionis: GhostFish: RexTalionis: Look, I don't like defending Romney, but I don't really see the big deal about this. He's a candidate running an election with an extremely polarised populace. Of course he's going to denigrate the voters of the other side.

You really think that the Obama campaign doesn't think that a good portion of Romney's base is a bunch of racist whackjobs, either?

This would be like Obama coming out and saying that everyone voting against him is a racist whackjob.

Okay, Obama knows better than saying that, even in private. But you can't tell me that a good number of liberals aren't thinking that exact thought.


I can tell you that. I absolutely refuse to believe there is even a negligible amount of liberals who think that anyone voting for Romney is a racist whackjob. Now, I happen to know of several people who are racist whackjobs, and they're voting for Romney, but how retarded would I have to be to extrapolate that to the entire Republican electorate? I think most liberals, if not nearly all, are smart enough to differentiate between the racist farktards and the regular GOP farktards.
 
2012-09-17 08:21:27 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?


Just asking questions, amirite??
 
2012-09-17 08:21:43 PM  

GAT_00: Is this where we pretend 'people who live off the government' only means minorities on food stamps and doesn't include the 40 million people on Social Security and Medicare, many of whom survive solely on those programs and vote Republican, or the defense contractors and the thousands who work for them who wouldn't have jobs without massive government funding, who also vote Republican?


This is the big, big question.

If Obama's people can convince Mr. and Mrs. AARP that he's very much talking about them (and there's no way to get anywhere near that 47% number without talking very clearly about them), then the election should be a bloodbath. On the other hand, though, there's no demographic whose allegiances are more well-cemented (not entirely one way or the other, but individually cemented) than the over-65 voters.
 
2012-09-17 08:21:46 PM  
Hey, guess what Mitt, some of those 47% of Americans who pay no income taxes? Those people you say think "they are victims" and "can't live without the govt.?" Well, uh, guess what?

Some of them regularly vote Republican.

That's right, not every Republican voter is rich enough to pay income taxes. Yes, they pay other taxes, like SSI, sales taxes, property taxes. But not every Republican also pays income taxes. You just said those people are pretty much worthless, so, great job.

But, hey, if anyone on this thread actually thinks this is a GOOD thing for Mitt to say, I'm sure you will contact the Romney campaign and tell him to run ads with him saying the exact same thing with a better camera. No one thinks what Romney said was smart. It's what you expect to hear from a radio shock jock, not a major political party candidate. So, again, great job Romney, you twit.
 
2012-09-17 08:23:02 PM  
And the scary thing is that Mitt was just saying exactly what his base wants him to say. There are millions of Republicans out there who would like nothing more than to see the end of welfare, Social Security, Medicare, food stamps, without even a thought of opening their own wallets to help anyone.
 
2012-09-17 08:23:42 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: Oh, and Romney doesn't believe he was born into privlege:

"I have inherited nothing." He remarked, "There is a perception, 'Oh, we were born with a silver spoon, he never had to earn anything and so forth.' Frankly, I was born with a silver spoon, which is the greatest gift you can have: which is to get born in America."


In 1994 I first heard about Mitt Romney, I was at an AMC car show and George Romney was speaking and he gave his little speech that included how his son was running for office and that we should give money to his campaign to improve America. Funny that for such a selfmade man he needed help from his dad to start and finance his political career.
 
2012-09-17 08:24:08 PM  
All this from a guy who would rather eat tuna fish off an ironing board than get a job or have his wife get a job.
 
2012-09-17 08:25:28 PM  
The number could be well higher than 47% given the massive deficits we run (and would run even if the defense budget was zero), but that would prove awkward for Mitt as well as Obama.

If you want to simply compare what we pay in federal taxes to what we get back in federal transfers alone, the bottom three quintiles come out ahead.

If you want to compare what we pay in taxes to all the spending, what P.J. O'Rourke found 20 years ago in "Parliament of Whores" is going to be even truer now considering how far in hock we are...

...that 95% of us are moochers.
 
2012-09-17 08:25:53 PM  
i'm pretty sure he was just quoting the Bible.
 
2012-09-17 08:26:29 PM  

"All right -- there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent on government,
who believe that, that they are victims, who believe that government has the responsibility to care for them.
Who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing."


This is what Republicans actually believe

 
2012-09-17 08:26:49 PM  
So the son of a CEO and Governor called half the country moochers? This really distills the problem down to his essence, doesn't it?
 
2012-09-17 08:27:07 PM  

RyogaM: That's right, not every Republican voter is rich enough to pay income taxes. Yes, they pay other taxes, like SSI, sales taxes, property taxes. But not every Republican also pays income taxes. You just said those people are pretty much worthless, so, great job.


Those Republican voters don't think they're part of the 47% that pays no income tax, even if they don't actually pay any income tax. They think they EARNED their disability check, and whatever money they get from Uncle Sam every month is money they're rightfully owed. They know in their souls that the 47% is liberal down to the last Mexican albino, retarded lesbian transgender who was given $800,000 to major in Ancient Greek Gender Studies, Basket Weaving, and Communist Philosophy. Rush told them so.
 
2012-09-17 08:27:13 PM  
I'm dependent on government and happily so. I like it when people get food stamps, because it means they're less likely to steal crap out of my carport.

But seriously. Why is it always us vs. them when it comes to GOP-ers' view of government?? It's not like we import an alien species from another planet to run the DMV office, the probate judge's office and the police department and oversee the construction of dams and bridges. They're people just like me.

If anything, an "alien species" runs our banks and insurance companies, because they answer to dollars and shareholders, not to the people they're serving.
 
2012-09-17 08:27:17 PM  

Nabb1: vartian: Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?

No. I believe peopled are entitled to those things. It is farking ludicrous to even entertain the thought that 47% of the country agrees with me.

No, they aren't. You're not entitled to anything else from anyone else. Providing for those who cannot provide for themselves is charity, and there's nothing wrong with helping people. But no one has a right to demand the government provide them anything. "A government that has the power to give you something has the power to take it away." - Thomas Jefferson. If you can provide yourself with the necessities in life, you have no right to demand others do so for you.


You are quite wrong. You are entitled to at least a few things from EVERYONE:
1. To be left alone by them to live your life as you choose
2. To be treated by them as they would treat anyone else, and as they would like to be treated.

Those aren't material things, of course, which is what you were talking about.

I also think you mis-understand the nature of safety nets. Do you think the elderly got together and demanded Social Security? Do you thing the poor got together and demanded welfare? That's not how it worked. The people of the country saw great wrongs -- elderly people who had worked all their lives being swindled out of their savings and falling into abysmal poverty. Children whose only mistake was to be born into the wrong family not having any chance to live up to their potential. People dying of easily treatable conditions because they had no access to medical care. Those things prompted people to try to do something about it on a large scale, and felt that the government was the best last line of defense.

Of course, once a government program is created to help people, it's absolutely reasonable that the people who qualify for it demand that they get it when they need it. Is there something wrong with that? Should they just sit quietly and hope that the someone notices they need help?
 
2012-09-17 08:27:31 PM  

spongeboob: shower_in_my_socks: Oh, and Romney doesn't believe he was born into privlege:

"I have inherited nothing." He remarked, "There is a perception, 'Oh, we were born with a silver spoon, he never had to earn anything and so forth.' Frankly, I was born with a silver spoon, which is the greatest gift you can have: which is to get born in America."

In 1994 I first heard about Mitt Romney, I was at an AMC car show and George Romney was speaking and he gave his little speech that included how his son was running for office and that we should give money to his campaign to improve America. Funny that for such a selfmade man he needed help from his dad to start and finance his political career.



Also a blatant LIE in light of the well-publicized anecdote from Ann about how they got through their early married live by selling of stock that Mitt's father bought for him. That only counts as "no inheritance" in the strictest definition of the term, as George was still alive at the time.
 
2012-09-17 08:27:34 PM  

WTF Indeed: mrshowrules: I'm saying Obama now even has a shot at Texas. I'm talking the whole video not just the 47% crack. It makes Republicans stay home, it energizes Obama's base and quite possibly allows the DNC to hold on to the Senate which is very tight. Wait until the seniors clue in to what Romney just said. wait until Romney makes things much worse but playing the victim on this tomorrow. Wait until Obama uses it to ask for Romney's tax returns again. This will be the gift that keeps on giving.

You think I'm being stupid. Will see

There are two things most people who talk politics like you lack, scope and context. Those are two things you are a missing here.


assets.sbnation.com
 
2012-09-17 08:28:13 PM  

All2morrowsparTs: Speaking of sounding like an idiot, the assertion that you made in the first part of your statement is micro economics.

Also if you took an accredited course in micro economics you would know that taxes are not fully passed on to the customer and typically shared between producer and consumer. The other two of your absolutes are not. Corporate taxes are do not effect hiring as employees are an expense and drive down profits therefore owed taxes. If you fire some one because of increased taxes you increase your taxable earnings. that is just poor management.


Makes perfect sense if controllers of capital are mobster-extortionists. Gee, what a fine economy you have there. It sure would be a shame if taxes got raised, some folks could not make high enough returns. Yup, a damn shame, someone may just get hurt.
 
2012-09-17 08:28:27 PM  

Corvus: Holy shiat this is now the Google "Top Story" which means everyone is clicking it.


growlersoftware.com
 
2012-09-17 08:28:30 PM  
The funniest part is that if he were right--if this "47%" of the country who pay no federal income tax voted exclusively for Obama--Romney would lose in a landslide of historic proportions. And now here he is insulting their character and telling them to go fark themselves--doing his damnedest to make his bullshiat come true. I think that's great.

/never mind that it is an absurd and vicious lie to suggest that anyone who doesn't pay federal income taxes is, essentially, a leech
 
2012-09-17 08:28:45 PM  

Lawnchair: GAT_00: Is this where we pretend 'people who live off the government' only means minorities on food stamps and doesn't include the 40 million people on Social Security and Medicare, many of whom survive solely on those programs and vote Republican, or the defense contractors and the thousands who work for them who wouldn't have jobs without massive government funding, who also vote Republican?

This is the big, big question.

If Obama's people can convince Mr. and Mrs. AARP that he's very much talking about them (and there's no way to get anywhere near that 47% number without talking very clearly about them), then the election should be a bloodbath. On the other hand, though, there's no demographic whose allegiances are more well-cemented (not entirely one way or the other, but individually cemented) than the over-65 voters.


Yeah, you're talking about my father. A Teabagger, who, ten years ago, at 61, had a major stroke which left him half paralyzed. He ran thru his $1 million lifetime limit insurance then had to go on disability and medicare. He and his wife pay zero federal income taxes, yet supported every dumbass thing that ran up the deficits under Bush. I and my wife, with our three kids, pay federal income taxes and both parts of SSI/Medicare because we are self-employed. We will never vote for a Republican because they have lost their petty little minds.
 
2012-09-17 08:28:55 PM  

Gyrfalcon: mrshowrules: Dancin_In_Anson: they are "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Is this an inaccurate statement?

Yes it is. He said 47%. 47% might want access to affordable health care insurance and employment. The number of people as a percentage that want a free ride, would in theory be at least less than the unemployment rate or do you assume all people who can't find work are lazy?

You know DIA does in fact believe that anyone who is on any form of government relief is a lazy leech who has no desire to do anything but lay around and be waited on. You know, all those people on unemployment who need to get out there and find a job that doesn't exist so they can get off the government tit.


I should know this but I just can't help myself most of the time.
 
2012-09-17 08:29:22 PM  
it had been a day since a Romney fark up. Good to see him keeping pace.
 
2012-09-17 08:29:35 PM  
I am going to leave this here (Warning: citations and math ahead):

- 8.2% of unemployment payments are attributed to technical overpayment, but only 1.9% of unemployment welfare is due to fraud. So, ~90% of unemployment welfare is legitimate by current rules of eligibility.
Link

- Less than 25% of the entire federal budget goes to DHHS, the department that controls TANF (the program that funds poor families). Less than 2% of the DHHS budget goes to TANF. Mathematically, that means only 0.5% of the entire federal budget goes to fund low income families this way. Hardly the money sink the GOP is making it out to be. Furthermore, TANF is capped (lifetime) at 5 years, and 90% of recipients have fewer than 3 children.
Link
Link
Link

It is easy to blame the poor, to say they deserve it, to say they don't want to work, that they are lazy. Of course this is true for some, but not for all. It is easy to blame them because to accept otherwise is to admit that it could happen to you, and no one wants to believe that they could be burdened with misfortune despite good intentions and hard work and effort. But they not our enemies, they are friends, family members, coworkers, people like us.

The job market needs to be fixed. The ever widening income/class gap needs to be fixed. Without direct acknowledgment and plans for these remedies, the GOP won't solve any problems.
 
2012-09-17 08:30:22 PM  
Wonder if any of that 47% is clinging to God and guns while feeling entitled.
 
2012-09-17 08:30:55 PM  

RyogaM: Hey, guess what Mitt, some of those 47% of Americans who pay no income taxes? Those people you say think "they are victims" and "can't live without the govt.?" Well, uh, guess what?

Some of them regularly vote Republican.

That's right, not every Republican voter is rich enough to pay income taxes. Yes, they pay other taxes, like SSI, sales taxes, property taxes. But not every Republican also pays income taxes. You just said those people are pretty much worthless, so, great job.

But, hey, if anyone on this thread actually thinks this is a GOOD thing for Mitt to say, I'm sure you will contact the Romney campaign and tell him to run ads with him saying the exact same thing with a better camera. No one thinks what Romney said was smart. It's what you expect to hear from a radio shock jock, not a major political party candidate. So, again, great job Romney, you twit.


You mean guys like this guy
upload.wikimedia.org


Link
 
2012-09-17 08:31:45 PM  

Lawnchair: GAT_00: Is this where we pretend 'people who live off the government' only means minorities on food stamps and doesn't include the 40 million people on Social Security and Medicare, many of whom survive solely on those programs and vote Republican, or the defense contractors and the thousands who work for them who wouldn't have jobs without massive government funding, who also vote Republican?

This is the big, big question.

If Obama's people can convince Mr. and Mrs. AARP that he's very much talking about them (and there's no way to get anywhere near that 47% number without talking very clearly about them), then the election should be a bloodbath. On the other hand, though, there's no demographic whose allegiances are more well-cemented (not entirely one way or the other, but individually cemented) than the over-65 voters.


I have only my dad to offer up as an example here, but quite an example he is: at 72, a lifelong Republican fiscal conservative/social moderate, he just switched from R to Independent. And yes, as much as it pains him to admit it, he's voting for the Democrat for the first time in his life.

I don't think he's the only one.
 
2012-09-17 08:31:49 PM  
a completely unadvertised network (all of them) primetime news replacement broadcast of the complete video would have been the greatest October Surprise of all time . Surely the combined superpac $ could have afforded that.

Mitt might have actually dropped out.
 
2012-09-17 08:32:28 PM  

Gulper Eel: The number could be well higher than 47% given the massive deficits we run (and would run even if the defense budget was zero), but that would prove awkward for Mitt as well as Obama.

If you want to simply compare what we pay in federal taxes to what we get back in federal transfers alone, the bottom three quintiles come out ahead.

If you want to compare what we pay in taxes to all the spending, what P.J. O'Rourke found 20 years ago in "Parliament of Whores" is going to be even truer now considering how far in hock we are...

...that 95% of us are moochers.


Canada had debt problems in the 90s. We even had our credit downgraded to AAA to AA. We since recovered our credit rating and we have a balance budget predicted for 2016 and a 7.1% unemployment rate. You know how we did it? I'll give you a hint, it wasn't by cutting spending or social benefits.
 
2012-09-17 08:32:55 PM  

stainedglassdoll: The job market needs to be fixed. The ever widening income/class gap needs to be fixed. Without direct acknowledgment and plans for these remedies, the GOP won't solve any problems.


But what Romney want's to do is play class warfare and pretend why the country is not doing better is because of all the poor, old and sick people not working hard enough.
 
2012-09-17 08:33:57 PM  

stainedglassdoll: I am going to leave this here (Warning: citations and math ahead):

- 8.2% of unemployment payments are attributed to technical overpayment, but only 1.9% of unemployment welfare is due to fraud. So, ~90% of unemployment welfare is legitimate by current rules of eligibility.
Link

- Less than 25% of the entire federal budget goes to DHHS, the department that controls TANF (the program that funds poor families). Less than 2% of the DHHS budget goes to TANF. Mathematically, that means only 0.5% of the entire federal budget goes to fund low income families this way. Hardly the money sink the GOP is making it out to be. Furthermore, TANF is capped (lifetime) at 5 years, and 90% of recipients have fewer than 3 children.
Link
Link
Link

It is easy to blame the poor, to say they deserve it, to say they don't want to work, that they are lazy. Of course this is true for some, but not for all. It is easy to blame them because to accept otherwise is to admit that it could happen to you, and no one wants to believe that they could be burdened with misfortune despite good intentions and hard work and effort. But they not our enemies, they are friends, family members, coworkers, people like us.

The job market needs to be fixed. The ever widening income/class gap needs to be fixed. Without direct acknowledgment and plans for these remedies, the GOP won't solve any problems.


Didn't the Governor of Florida make the assumption that everyone on welfare were in fact drug users?
 
2012-09-17 08:35:52 PM  

Corvus: stainedglassdoll: The job market needs to be fixed. The ever widening income/class gap needs to be fixed. Without direct acknowledgment and plans for these remedies, the GOP won't solve any problems.

But what Romney want's to do is play class warfare and pretend why the country is not doing better is because of all the poor, old and sick people not working hard enough.


the contempt this silver spoon asshole has for the working poor genuinely angers me.
 
2012-09-17 08:36:00 PM  
This is Romney's "You didn't build that."

Except it's a legitimate dumbfark quote.
 
2012-09-17 08:36:20 PM  
Oh, this is just the mainstream media taking him out of context again. The first video cuts out the remainder of what he said. I've added it below.

There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. There are 47% of this country who think they are entitled to tree fitty. WELL it was about that time I realized this was not the American people, but dat good for nothing Loch Ness Monster asking for more handouts again! So I said, "I ain't givin' you no tree-fitty, you goddamn Loch Ness Monster! Get your own goddamn money!"
 
2012-09-17 08:36:22 PM  
How about all the big corporations, who are huge donors to lobbyists and conservative candidate campaigns, who are dependent on the government for massive tax breaks (hey Mitt, GE doesn't pay taxes either), subsidized payments, and generous government contracts for goods and services?
 
2012-09-17 08:36:27 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Aarontology: "dependent on government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing,"

Yeah, those soldiers and veterans need to shut the f*ck up.

And old people and children.


And people that got laid off in 2008.

/ I collected UI for a few months...
 
2012-09-17 08:36:48 PM  
If you ever did wonder could the right really mean they don't care if certain segments of our fellow citizens died of illness and hunger in the streets, remember this video.
 
2012-09-17 08:37:04 PM  
Born on third, thinks he hit a triple.
 
2012-09-17 08:37:41 PM  

namegoeshere: I have only my dad to offer up as an example here, but quite an example he is: at 72, a lifelong Republican fiscal conservative/social moderate, he just switched from R to Independent. And yes, as much as it pains him to admit it, he's voting for the Democrat for the first time in his life.

I don't think he's the only one.


One can only hope. I see all the signs that suggest Romney is in trouble and his campaign is running full speed through an ice field, but I can't bring myself to be optimistic, yet.
 
2012-09-17 08:37:46 PM  
As it turns out, Mitt Romney is a really horrible human being. Who knew? Oh, wait, more than 47% of us did. Now, get your asses out and vote.
 
2012-09-17 08:38:48 PM  
FreeRepublic is gold on this:

If anything, this was leaked intentionally by team Romney because it's red meat for the base. I love it when people speak candidly and I believe this will ultimately end up being well received. No doubt, the Obamamedia leg humpers will try to make a controversy out of it but it only encourages me to support Romney even more.

3 posted on Mon Sep 17 2012 19:07:43 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by NoobRep

And the media thinks this statement will HURT Romney? Bwa-ahahahahaha.

6 posted on Mon Sep 17 2012 19:08:27 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by LS ("Castles Made of Sand, Fall in the Sea . . . Eventually (Hendrix))

I hope this is an intentional leak to start the much needed and long overdue conversation about entitlements in this country. It's just driving us off a fiscal cliff.

12 posted on Mon Sep 17 2012 19:12:22 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by NoobRep

Sure- Count all TSA workers, county, state and federal employees, welfare recipients, those on disability, illegals, public school teachers, administrators, assistants, principals, supervisors of assorted types, school bus drivers, gardeners, cleaning crew, SEIU types, and of course its 47% Obama. How else can anyone justify why one with Obama's record, a domestic and foreign policy agenda up in smoke and reduced in ashes, would not be behind by 10-15 points against any serious challenger. Add to this the tribal vote of Blacks, Hispanics, and liberal Jews, NARAL, the LGBT crowd, academics, and the trial lawyers association, and it puts Obama over the top. Anyone surprised that Obama will be re-elected and our nation will be over the cliff. Pray this would not happen but prepare for Third World status.

22 posted on Mon Sep 17 2012 19:21:28 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by Steelfish (ui)
 
2012-09-17 08:39:33 PM  
I see the whole "Welfare Queens" thing is making a comeback.
 
2012-09-17 08:39:43 PM  
You'd think if the democrats weren't so incompetent that they'd just hook another 4% of the voters on their government dependency program and have an unassailable majority.
 
2012-09-17 08:40:22 PM  

mrshowrules: Canada had debt problems in the 90s. We even had our credit downgraded to AAA to AA. We since recovered our credit rating and we have a balance budget predicted for 2016 and a 7.1% unemployment rate. You know how we did it? I'll give you a hint, it wasn't by cutting spending or social benefits.


I'm not sure the comparison holds. Isn't Canada's GDP less than the state of California's? Hardly the same scale of economy when compared to the United States.
 
2012-09-17 08:41:52 PM  
The American dream is a good job, a nice home, and a growing savings account.

The Repugnantcan dream is standing atop one of the ramparts of your mansion-fortress and beating off while watching the rest of society starve to death outside.

they can't be happy unless you suffer
 
2012-09-17 08:42:03 PM  
One of the things at work here (I think) is a Fundamental Attribution Error. In other words: If I fail it's because of circumstances beyond my control. But if YOU fail it's because you're lazy and stupid and you dress funny.
 
2012-09-17 08:42:27 PM  

MorrisBird: As it turns out, Mitt Romney is a really horrible human being. Who knew? Oh, wait, more than 47% of us did. Now, get your asses out and vote.


QFMFT
 
2012-09-17 08:42:33 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: Born on third, thinks he hit a triple.


I've never heard that saying before, but as a sports aficionado and of literary metaphor, that is great!
 
2012-09-17 08:43:32 PM  

bootman: Romney told the contributors that "women are open to supporting me," but that "we are having a much harder time with Hispanic voters, and if the Hispanic voting bloc becomes as committed to the Democrats as the African American voting block has in the past, why, we're in trouble as a party and, I think, as a nation."

That's some choice racism right there that is.


So facts are racist.
 
2012-09-17 08:44:38 PM  
I am voting for Obama. I am employed. I provide my own food and housing and pay for my own health insurance. To say that I, and the 47% of other Americans who will vote for Obama no matter what expect those things to be provided for me by the government is disgusting and patently false. Oh, and I also paid a greater percentage of income tax than Romney did last year.
 
2012-09-17 08:45:06 PM  
Mitt Romney dodged the war in Vietnam by moving to France, and he's now saying that disabled vets who rely on the government are losers.

Candidate Mittens is 100x worse than I ever imagined.
 
2012-09-17 08:45:39 PM  

themeaningoflifeisnot: mrshowrules: Canada had debt problems in the 90s. We even had our credit downgraded to AAA to AA. We since recovered our credit rating and we have a balance budget predicted for 2016 and a 7.1% unemployment rate. You know how we did it? I'll give you a hint, it wasn't by cutting spending or social benefits.

I'm not sure the comparison holds. Isn't Canada's GDP less than the state of California's? Hardly the same scale of economy when compared to the United States.


We raised taxes and regulated the banks. Canada is 1/10th the size of the US but our unemployment increase because we raised taxes. If you don't like the scale, look at the US's own history. There was a 65 year study published yesterday I believe that shows the raising taxes on the upper brackets has no impact on GDP or unemployment. Just consider Canada as an example of how well the US could be doing today if it wasn't for electing Dubya.
 
2012-09-17 08:46:36 PM  

mrshowrules: themeaningoflifeisnot: mrshowrules: Canada had debt problems in the 90s. We even had our credit downgraded to AAA to AA. We since recovered our credit rating and we have a balance budget predicted for 2016 and a 7.1% unemployment rate. You know how we did it? I'll give you a hint, it wasn't by cutting spending or social benefits.

I'm not sure the comparison holds. Isn't Canada's GDP less than the state of California's? Hardly the same scale of economy when compared to the United States.

We raised taxes and regulated the banks. Canada is 1/10th the size of the US but our unemployment didn't increase because we raised taxes. If you don't like the scale, look at the US's own history. There was a 65 year study published yesterday I believe that shows the raising or lowering taxes on the upper brackets has no impact on GDP or unemployment. Just consider Canada as an example of how well the US could be doing today if it wasn't for electing Dubya.

 
2012-09-17 08:46:48 PM  

tomcatadam: beta_plus: Taxing corporations does not work

Giving corporations tax breaks does not work either, particularly because they proceed to do everything BUT spending the money in a way that would even transiently be beneficial to their country or countrymen


Yes, because economic growth comes from the government.
 
2012-09-17 08:47:59 PM