Mitt Romney Video (Page 3)

ejshowers - 2012-09-18 3:47 PM

TriRSquared - 2012-09-18 3:23 PM

jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-18 4:15 PM

JoshR - 2012-09-18 11:45 AM

TriRSquared - 2012-09-18 10:16 AM

I had this same discussion on FB this AM.  Here was my reply there (so it might seem a bit out of context).

--------

(Other person posted about Mitt be a trust fund baby and how the OPs dad worked from nothing to being successful)

My parents were not rich either, they worked their off to provide for my brother and me. And from the age of 14 I had a job. I worked 20+ hours a week all through college to pay for school.

There is a SMALL percentage of people in this country who TRULY have no chance of making their lives better. Through disability or illness or lack of god given intelligence. I have zero issue supporting these people 100% until the day they die.

But drive through the "bad" section of town some time and look at the rims on the cars. Then look at the crappy homes. Now notice all the satellite dishes on the roofs. Notice the iPhones in the hands. Don't tell me for a second that these examples cannot better themselves. They chose not to.

Just because you have money does not preclude you from recognizing the systemic problems in this country. Did he (Mitt) chose the wrong words. Yes 100%. Does he have a good basic underlying point. Yep.

 

The problem with Romney's statement, is looking at the 47%. There is a sizable chunk of these people who are retired or very young and in school, like me 2 years ago. He just lumped all of us in with the "welfare queens". I don't like Romney or Obama and normally I take what they say with a grain of salt. This one really irks me though. It shows a profound lack of understanding about an issue facing this country. 

The biggest problem to me, is he was at some fundraiser probably raising $1,000,000+ and this what the people WANT to hear. They don't come to see him say he wants to be bipartisan. They pony up huge dough to listen to him treat half of the country like we're scum on his shoes. That's why we are facing the hostile political climate we are in.

I was reminded of his offhand $10,000 bet he tossed out during one of the debates last year. (G-d, has this been going on a year already? Ugh&hellip I understood that it was an off-the-cuff remark and that he was making a point, but it’s hard to convince the average working person that you understand them and can relate to their situation when you casually toss out a wager that’s a quarter of what they make in a year as if it’s pocket change.

Please explain how a person's net worth is correlated to their ability to understand the "common man"?  By your same logic Obama does not understand the "working man" as he has never worked a day in the private sector.

...and it really bothers me that I feel compelled to defend a guy I'm not voting for.  I just get tired of the nonsense being tossed around.

Another right-wing lie.  Obama worked as an attorney in Chicago and taught Con. Law at the U. of Chicago.

Lets not fools ourselves into thinking either one of these guys understands the daily struggles of the common man.

dsand97 - 2012-09-18 4:03 PM

ejshowers - 2012-09-18 3:47 PM

TriRSquared - 2012-09-18 3:23 PM

jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-18 4:15 PM

JoshR - 2012-09-18 11:45 AM

TriRSquared - 2012-09-18 10:16 AM

I had this same discussion on FB this AM.  Here was my reply there (so it might seem a bit out of context).

--------

(Other person posted about Mitt be a trust fund baby and how the OPs dad worked from nothing to being successful)

My parents were not rich either, they worked their off to provide for my brother and me. And from the age of 14 I had a job. I worked 20+ hours a week all through college to pay for school.

There is a SMALL percentage of people in this country who TRULY have no chance of making their lives better. Through disability or illness or lack of god given intelligence. I have zero issue supporting these people 100% until the day they die.

But drive through the "bad" section of town some time and look at the rims on the cars. Then look at the crappy homes. Now notice all the satellite dishes on the roofs. Notice the iPhones in the hands. Don't tell me for a second that these examples cannot better themselves. They chose not to.

Just because you have money does not preclude you from recognizing the systemic problems in this country. Did he (Mitt) chose the wrong words. Yes 100%. Does he have a good basic underlying point. Yep.

 

The problem with Romney's statement, is looking at the 47%. There is a sizable chunk of these people who are retired or very young and in school, like me 2 years ago. He just lumped all of us in with the "welfare queens". I don't like Romney or Obama and normally I take what they say with a grain of salt. This one really irks me though. It shows a profound lack of understanding about an issue facing this country. 

The biggest problem to me, is he was at some fundraiser probably raising $1,000,000+ and this what the people WANT to hear. They don't come to see him say he wants to be bipartisan. They pony up huge dough to listen to him treat half of the country like we're scum on his shoes. That's why we are facing the hostile political climate we are in.

I was reminded of his offhand $10,000 bet he tossed out during one of the debates last year. (G-d, has this been going on a year already? Ugh&hellip I understood that it was an off-the-cuff remark and that he was making a point, but it’s hard to convince the average working person that you understand them and can relate to their situation when you casually toss out a wager that’s a quarter of what they make in a year as if it’s pocket change.

Please explain how a person's net worth is correlated to their ability to understand the "common man"?  By your same logic Obama does not understand the "working man" as he has never worked a day in the private sector.

...and it really bothers me that I feel compelled to defend a guy I'm not voting for.  I just get tired of the nonsense being tossed around.

Another right-wing lie.  Obama worked as an attorney in Chicago and taught Con. Law at the U. of Chicago.

Lets not fools ourselves into thinking either one of these guys understands the daily struggles of the common man.

Agree.  I should have only bolded the "never worked ..." section. 

Looks like Romney is trying to see the "controversy" video and raise them one.  This headline was just plastered on Drudge Report

"I actually Believe in Redistribution"

Per my earlier post, I'm guessing Team R/R was saving this one for late October as well.

Typical example of what has been a reoccuring theme...'Mitten's" LACK of diplomacy.   Regardless of his level of business 'experience' or the promise of a better, brighter America under his stewardship, Romney has proven to be a trainwreck on ANY issue that doesn't include bashing the current administration. 

It's not simply about the Economy.  It's about the environment, and trade agreements and the reasoned use of our military to project peace around the globe.  Mitt Romney has proven to me he is neither the face nor the voice of the person I want representing my USA.

Who do you think planned for the roads, paid to design the roads, paid to build the roads, paid to maintain the roads? Yes, it comes out of your taxes. That is the purpose of government - to have a system where elected representatives organize in order to design, build, and maintain the infrastructure we all use. Yes, it would be pretty silly to write a thank you note to your congressman because the road you drove on was there. But the point is that we all contribute and we all benefit. No one says you are lazy or have a poor work ethic because you think you are entitled to roads, ambulances, safe drugs and food, police and a (mostly) reliable judicial system. But if those things were taken away, would you complain?

How so? Are you saying you don't rely on the roads? That you are only convenienced by them? You would get around just fine if we didn't have any roads to get from place to place? Or police to ensure that brigands didn't waylay you on your route from town to town?

Just because we don't technically need to be tactful ,as a nation or president, at a given moment doesn't mean that we shouldn't be and are soft.  Romney's ability to make things that are as gray as international trade/diplomacy and the economy into a purely black in white issue is a good example of that to me.  I'm in the military and I use the GI Bill, so I'm on the gov't dime but I am on it as an offered incentive to a job that most people don't want.  I'm not voting for Obama because I want my monthly benefits check but because overall I believe he has done a decent job on issues important to me.  Also because I have no desire to be at war for the rest of my career.

Easier, yes.  Fairer, no.

Reliance is not a zero-sum game. The people and government can (and should) be mutually dependent on one another. When one no longer needs the other, that is when there is trouble in River City. Which is why the Citizens United decision was such a bad one - it makes the elected officials more dependent on the large corporate donations and less on the smaller individual ones. Given the low voter turnouts, and the high rates of re-election, we cannot afford to have the citizens less important than they already are.

jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-18 6:04 PM

TriRSquared - 2012-09-18 3:23 PM

jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-18 4:15 PM

JoshR - 2012-09-18 11:45 AM

TriRSquared - 2012-09-18 10:16 AM

I had this same discussion on FB this AM.  Here was my reply there (so it might seem a bit out of context).

--------

(Other person posted about Mitt be a trust fund baby and how the OPs dad worked from nothing to being successful)

My parents were not rich either, they worked their off to provide for my brother and me. And from the age of 14 I had a job. I worked 20+ hours a week all through college to pay for school.

There is a SMALL percentage of people in this country who TRULY have no chance of making their lives better. Through disability or illness or lack of god given intelligence. I have zero issue supporting these people 100% until the day they die.

But drive through the "bad" section of town some time and look at the rims on the cars. Then look at the crappy homes. Now notice all the satellite dishes on the roofs. Notice the iPhones in the hands. Don't tell me for a second that these examples cannot better themselves. They chose not to.

Just because you have money does not preclude you from recognizing the systemic problems in this country. Did he (Mitt) chose the wrong words. Yes 100%. Does he have a good basic underlying point. Yep.

 

The problem with Romney's statement, is looking at the 47%. There is a sizable chunk of these people who are retired or very young and in school, like me 2 years ago. He just lumped all of us in with the "welfare queens". I don't like Romney or Obama and normally I take what they say with a grain of salt. This one really irks me though. It shows a profound lack of understanding about an issue facing this country. 

The biggest problem to me, is he was at some fundraiser probably raising $1,000,000+ and this what the people WANT to hear. They don't come to see him say he wants to be bipartisan. They pony up huge dough to listen to him treat half of the country like we're scum on his shoes. That's why we are facing the hostile political climate we are in.

I was reminded of his offhand $10,000 bet he tossed out during one of the debates last year. (G-d, has this been going on a year already? Ugh&hellip I understood that it was an off-the-cuff remark and that he was making a point, but it’s hard to convince the average working person that you understand them and can relate to their situation when you casually toss out a wager that’s a quarter of what they make in a year as if it’s pocket change.

Please explain how a person's net worth is correlated to their ability to understand the "common man"?  By your same logic Obama does not understand the "working man" as he has never worked a day in the private sector.

...and it really bothers me that I feel compelled to defend a guy I'm not voting for.  I just get tired of the nonsense being tossed around.

It has nothing to do with his net worth--it has everything to do with at least acting like you give a damn about people who have less than you have. When you're auditioning to lead a country that's in the midst of a recession and people are out if work and are in danger of losing their homes, it strikes me as incredibly insensitive to casually wave around ten grand as if you just scraped it off your shoe. That three or four months' salary to a lot of people.

It was a republican debate.  All the people watching it do have $10k on the bottom of their shoes.

Yep - nothing connects with the struggling folks like taking multiple exotic vacations and playing over 100 rounds of golf, partying with celebrities etc while sympathizing with their plight...

Neither candidate walks in the shoes of these people - its lip service from both sides.

tuwood - 2012-09-18 7:23 PM

jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-18 6:04 PM

TriRSquared - 2012-09-18 3:23 PM

jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-18 4:15 PM

JoshR - 2012-09-18 11:45 AM

TriRSquared - 2012-09-18 10:16 AM

I had this same discussion on FB this AM.  Here was my reply there (so it might seem a bit out of context).

--------

(Other person posted about Mitt be a trust fund baby and how the OPs dad worked from nothing to being successful)

My parents were not rich either, they worked their off to provide for my brother and me. And from the age of 14 I had a job. I worked 20+ hours a week all through college to pay for school.

There is a SMALL percentage of people in this country who TRULY have no chance of making their lives better. Through disability or illness or lack of god given intelligence. I have zero issue supporting these people 100% until the day they die.

But drive through the "bad" section of town some time and look at the rims on the cars. Then look at the crappy homes. Now notice all the satellite dishes on the roofs. Notice the iPhones in the hands. Don't tell me for a second that these examples cannot better themselves. They chose not to.

Just because you have money does not preclude you from recognizing the systemic problems in this country. Did he (Mitt) chose the wrong words. Yes 100%. Does he have a good basic underlying point. Yep.

 

The problem with Romney's statement, is looking at the 47%. There is a sizable chunk of these people who are retired or very young and in school, like me 2 years ago. He just lumped all of us in with the "welfare queens". I don't like Romney or Obama and normally I take what they say with a grain of salt. This one really irks me though. It shows a profound lack of understanding about an issue facing this country. 

The biggest problem to me, is he was at some fundraiser probably raising $1,000,000+ and this what the people WANT to hear. They don't come to see him say he wants to be bipartisan. They pony up huge dough to listen to him treat half of the country like we're scum on his shoes. That's why we are facing the hostile political climate we are in.

I was reminded of his offhand $10,000 bet he tossed out during one of the debates last year. (G-d, has this been going on a year already? Ugh&hellip I understood that it was an off-the-cuff remark and that he was making a point, but it’s hard to convince the average working person that you understand them and can relate to their situation when you casually toss out a wager that’s a quarter of what they make in a year as if it’s pocket change.

Please explain how a person's net worth is correlated to their ability to understand the "common man"?  By your same logic Obama does not understand the "working man" as he has never worked a day in the private sector.

...and it really bothers me that I feel compelled to defend a guy I'm not voting for.  I just get tired of the nonsense being tossed around.

It has nothing to do with his net worth--it has everything to do with at least acting like you give a damn about people who have less than you have. When you're auditioning to lead a country that's in the midst of a recession and people are out if work and are in danger of losing their homes, it strikes me as incredibly insensitive to casually wave around ten grand as if you just scraped it off your shoe. That three or four months' salary to a lot of people.

It was a republican debate.  All the people watching it do have $10k on the bottom of their shoes.

Those are EXACTLY the thoughts that are in the thought bubbles over the Romney audience's heads. And maybe over Romney's head. And is exactly what's wrong. You've done a masterful job of making that point.

Could you tell me how many zero's there are i a gazillion? Is it more than a Trillion?

Is a bigger distinction that one is a capitalist or subscribes for the most part to free enterprise and the other pretty much subscribes to the goals and objectives of the Communist Party?

I guess with this little video that in the big scheme of things is really only news worthy if you spin it and twist what was said into something he didn't say. It makes for a good reason for Obama supporters to move away from the lies the press secretary and other Obama administration officials told the American public about the troubles, terrorist attacks and murder of Americans in the Middle east.

He traveled the world, went to college, started organizing communities... became a Senator.... made his first million off a book... didn't work one honest day in the Senate. Campaigned for two years, now is President. When he retires he will have full pension for the rest of his life. He will go to the speaker circuit, make a $100,000 dollars or more for a one hour talk, sell a few more books, do some interviews and never worry about another penny for the rest of his life. He will enjoy the benefits of his Office of around the clock security and health care for his entire family  that is head and shoulders above anything me and you will ever have access to.

What exactly does Obama have in common with the common working men and women of the middle calss??? HE IS a 1%er!!!

Look, he chose he words poorly, no doubt.  However when he refers to the 47% he's talking about the percentage of voters that he's never going to reach.  When he says "it's not my job to care about them" he means it's not his job as a candidate to try to sway them.  He needs to focus on the swing votes in the middle.

Does it still "sound" bad?  I guess.  But it's not the meaning that the media is trying to portray it as.

As for insensitive what do you call the Obamas' multiple overseas vacations while people are struggling to make ends meet?  One hotel was $3500 a night...

Because you cannot buy votes with that model. 

That is correct, I  think Tocqueville said it best "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress  discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money."

I'd be more than happy to suggest that....Obama though not a gazillionaire is just as disconnected from the middle class as anyone in the history of presidential races.  How many people need to suggest this in order to compose "some"?

He's just one of us.

Mitt's new press photo does not portray him that favorably

(Dr. Evil.jpg)