Skip to comments.Mitt's Missed Point: Caring About You Doesn't Mean Eternally Caring FOR You
Posted on 09/19/2012 5:12:50 AM PDT by suspects
You may recall that during the GOP primaries I ran a web site called AnyoneButMitt.com.
Having watched the stumbling, inept, ham-fisted campaigning of Mitt Romney the past few days, perhaps now you understand why.
The comment Mitt made about not caring about the 47 percent of Americans who pay no federal income taxes and/or who are on the dole was one of the worst, most self-destructive comments Ive ever heard from a politician. If as I hope Romney goes on to defeat President Barack Obama, it may be credited to what George Washington described as the hand of Providence, heavenly intervention at key moments in the life of our republic.
Because this thing sure as hell isnt being won by Mitt Romney.
Yes, I agree and have written often in this space about the rising tide of government dependency and the terrible impact of Team Obamas attempts to (paraphrasing Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihans famous phrase) define dependency down, to make life on the dole an acceptable lifestyle choice.
But those arguments disappear, crushed beneath the avalanche of political stupidity, when Mitt says I dont care.
For my fellow conservatives who have rushed to the barricades in Romneys defense, I have a simple question: Can you imagine that sentence ever coming from the mouth of Ronald Reagan? Me neither.
This inelegant phrase plays into one of the worst misconceptions about conservatives, that promoting self-reliance and celebrating success means you must not care about anyone else.
I had this argument thrown at me again and again earlier this week when I was in Ireland doing a series of speeches and debates on American politics. (Not surprisingly in a nation that considers Michael Moore a moderate, I was slightly outnumbered.)
Whenever I ran through the horrific impact of Obamanomics...
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonherald.com ...
it must necessarily follow, that some one portion of the community must pay in taxes more than it receives back in disbursements; while another receives in disbursements more than it pays in taxes
The necessary result, then, of the unequal fiscal action of the government is, to divide the community into two great classes; one consisting of those who, in reality, pay the taxes, and, of course, bear exclusively the burthen of supporting the government; and the other, of those who are the recipients of their proceeds, through disbursements, and who are, in fact, supported by the government; or, in fewer words, to divide it into tax-payers and tax-consumers.
He needs to state that a meager income does not equal a lack of personal responsibility, especially in today’s economy.
As Michael Graham said on “Imus” this morning: “We care ABOUT you, but we don’t want to have to care FOR you.”
Imus is a loud-mouthed, irreverent, misinformed doofus, but we try to see Graham’s appearances when he’s on. Today, he kicked ass. Expect the video can be seen via the Imus site.
People KNOW what Romney means, stop sweating it.
We all get it.
Yet, Michael, I HEAR much worse from the forked tongue of Der Leader Zero. Mitt at least OWNS the statement and as we discover, its not the complete video anyway.
Its not up to you to pile on with the lame streamers...dumazz...yeah..DO defend what he said. I don’t care if Reagan would have said it or not....Instead of sniping...do like THEY do...tell your lefty readers in Boston what he meant...
Defeatist azzholes, I swear...
Of course not. Romney cant win that argument, He is just the wrong person for this. He tries to repeat buzzlines that he thinks conservatives will like but he doesnt understand them and so he screws it up.
This is what happens when you put up an empty suit Grover...he nuked Perry, Newt and RS just to look stupid now.
Mitt AND this author miss another core point.
Liberals/leftists DON’T REALLY CARE about the poor.
What they REALLY care about how they feel about themselves for “caring about the poor”.
It’s worse than “works-based righteousness”, it’s “advocacy-based righteousness”.
“I’m a good person because of policies I advocate.”
Well said. It’s especially annoying when someone takes one phrase and expands it into a bloated attack article. Romney was speaking to contributors about electoral strategy, how he would spend their money. He uses the phrase “I don’t care about” a certain group meaning he won’t target them with his ads.
So we get Mr. Know it all write 10,000 words about that phrase. Reagan would never use it, blah blah. Reagan was busy bonding with Tip O’Neil by telling dirty jokes. Think that would sound “appropriate” if we had tapes?
Ronald Reagan yelled angrily at a black guy in Harlem during Reagan’s campaign. Did that sound like he cared? The guy was demanding of Reagan what would he do to help Harlem. The public loved it. What would Graham say if Romney told off a poor black guy?
that some one portion of the community must pay in taxes more than it receives back in disbursements; while another receives in disbursements more than it pays in taxes
While true, this description more or less ignores the costs of government itself.
The government also gets paid in between taking money from you and giving it to your neighbor. Salaries, benefits, pensions, “government product” processing costs (i.e. turning “dollars” into “food stamps”) etc...All of those things cost money too.
As bad as “some portion paying more than it receives while another receives more than it pays” sounds, there should be an addendum that reads “in between taking from you and giving to your neighbor, the government is paid too.”
Right now that cost is $3 to $1. It costs $3 in taxes to give out $1 in benefits. Let that sink in.
In Julia’s life it does.
Mitt: 47% are dependent on government
0bama: 100% are dependent on government
have you seen the video of the day..mitts mom on welfare and mitts comments?
It is time some ads compare what Romney has personally done for neighbors and strangers in his satellite compared to what Obama has done for people in his sphere. Put the question then, if you needed personal help, would you rather look up and see Romney or Obama standing there? When Obama’s brother needed financial help for his ailing child, it didn’t occur to him to even ask Barack, instead he asked for and got help from Dinesh Desouza. Closing ad line: ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS.
Mitt AND this author miss another core point.
Liberals/leftists DONT REALLY CARE about the poor.
What they REALLY care about how they feel about themselves for caring about the poor.
Its worse than works-based righteousness, its advocacy-based righteousness.
Im a good person because of policies I advocate.
MrB, your discerning message needs to be dispersed via Team Romney for it is TRUTH.
Excellent points and well, concisely put too. So true. They want the feeling of being good without actually having to do anything themselves.
” - - - not caring about the 47 percent of Americans who pay no federal income taxes - - - “
WRONG! Mitt used the word “worry” and not The Media spin-word “care.”
I don't know why anyone is surprised at Mitt's milquetoast performance in this campaign. He doesn't have the sort of life experiences that would have prepared him to fight the left like he ought to. He grew up in a sheltered, privileged, insulated environment, where he didn't even have to interact with the sort of sub-humans he's up against now.
He doesn't understand the left the way most of the other Republican primary challengers do. Most of them were raised in humble, ordinary circumstances. They know when it's time to roll up your sleeves and kick some scumbag butt.
In Mitt's public life, he's mostly made peace with the left by bending to their will and giving them what they want. Now that they're trying to bury him, he can't find the spine to attack them like he needs to. I'm afraid that's simply how he's built.