Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

47 percent (!)

Dear friends and readers,

It's the 47% that's troubling. Mitt Romney thinks 47% of Americans are deadbeats, freeloaders, people who see themselves as victims and with a right to food, shelter and health care. More than half of the US population.  The other day he said middle class people were people with $250,000 a year.

Of course this includes all older people on social security, It has to or how make the numbers up to 47%. Their decades of work and contribution count for nothing.

What universe does this man live in? It's a little worrying when he says he's not gonig to pay any attention to the 47%. They are no concern of his as none of them will ever vote for him.

To be fair, he also said that no one, no one has the right to food, shelter and health care as a human right. No one.  People who can't make access to these things for whatever reason should be left to freeze or live on the streets, starve and die if they are sick of whatever.



( 12 comments — Leave a comment )
Sep. 18th, 2012 09:36 pm (UTC)
Quoting Scrooge
Thus Caroline:

If they are to die, let them do it and decrease the surplus population?

Me: Right. Scrooge. Are there no workhouses? I made a blog and now will add the Scrooge reference. I remember Nixon had an appointee who said he couldn't understand why Bob Cratchet should get a day off with pay when he didn't work.
Sep. 18th, 2012 10:08 pm (UTC)
"We have to try to understand Willard. No one's ever told him, "no." He's never thought about the poor, because that's not what the rich do. He never served in the military--that's not what the sons of privilege do. The poorest person he knows probably make 250K and he thinks that's where the middle class line should be drawn. $1200/month that's what my son earns in the U S Army and it wouldn't keep Rafalca in hay." Murray
Sep. 18th, 2012 10:09 pm (UTC)
Ann Romney
A lot was made of the Bushes' life of privilege, at least since Prescott, but something the Kennedys and Bushes did was to raise their children with some kind of a sense of noblesse oblige. I remember George Romney and I never got this sense of a separate, entitled existence from him. But I wonder if the isolationism of the Mormon religion combined with the life of great wealth and privilege contributed to this "us versus them" mentality, even more than is found in most wealthy families. Remember Ann Romney also came from money, and her own parents were not permitted at her wedding because they are not Mormon. Jill
Sep. 19th, 2012 12:04 pm (UTC)
"Jill, yes I understand the Bushes knew how to be good to their employees... What worries me is the number of people getting "help" from the govt who will still vote him because they somehow think they deserve what they get and nobody else does." Diane

Yes somehow they think they are special. They are not freeloaders, but people who are sincerely in need of help. And the teabaggers are these poor people who will vote for Romney so he's wrong. Part of his base is in the 47% -- or he'd stand no chance of winning. There are not enough middle class (over $250000) and fabulously wealthy to make a win - that's why they must suppress the vote.

Sep. 19th, 2012 12:24 pm (UTC)
But Romney and his ilk see them all as freeloaders.

Me: Yes. I wonder how he feels when he's talking to them. I wish i could believe _their_ feeliings are hurt and they feel threatened by his saying how he won't concern himself with the 47%. Does nothing get through? It's not pointed out by the news media you see and unless something is put into a sign with letters one foot high they don't make the connection.
Sep. 19th, 2012 12:35 pm (UTC)
Tea-baggers, religious and pro-Ryan are precisely the people who might be driven to "cheat" on welfare. Before Clinton the rules were so stringent that if you had a part-time job and made a tiny salary, you would not be able to collect any help. There was never any welfare queen. This is nonsense. But people often hd to lie and to hide a husband if they wanted help. In effect they are "cheating." The reason these people hate gov't is they meet "bureaucrats" who won't give them anything if they have something already. They don't understand what they need is the gov't to be far more generous and they don't understand that there is plenty of money in gov't. They cannot get themselves to admit to these experiences but they are formative and frequent.

I've seen people similarly "cheat' to get unemployment insurance since the rules are again very stringent. They desperately needed help even if they had something.

In my own case, we got money back from the gov't through the tax system twice and I just would not go down there. I know what it is. Humiliating even before Clintons' destruction of welfare. (He's proud of that he said.) So we ate potato pancakes, the dog ate less and I bought outdated food from supermarkets. We did grow thin,

One does meet ex-liberal republicans who have no one to vote for. It's someone who sees the republicans caused the deficit. The charts are therer to see. Then Obama's problem is he's black and therefore "not legitimate," not acceptable to them.

Sep. 19th, 2012 03:19 pm (UTC)
Arthur: "Funny thing is, Mittens thinks he's a Christian. He should take a look at Matthew 25:33-41, where Christ speaks unto the Republicans."

"Sorry, that's 41-46. Like Mitt, I occasionally mix up my sheep and my goats."

Ellen: He was speaking to his fat cat rich constituency. This was not meant for his white poor working class teabagger type. I do hope they are made somewhat uncomfortable.

Arthur: In the unlikely event of a last judgment, they'll be a lot more so.

Edited at 2012-09-19 03:55 pm (UTC)
Sep. 20th, 2012 12:09 am (UTC)
I'm not sure I agree. His only mistake was not realizing he was being taped. What he said was shrewd, given his audience, and reflected his thinking honestly.

IN response to Bob, well I don't agree, even to that audience. We have to ask where does that number come from? When the Occupy Movement was strong and everyone in it talked of the 99%, the right wing in the US countered (on Fox News) with the 53%. Who are they? Only 53% of US citizens pay _federal income tax_. Many of the 47% pay state, city, sales tax.payroll tax. Who are they? elderly people whose income is on average $15,000. If you get only social security and nothing else and have no other income, you don't pay federal tax. The poor, the sick, the disabled, the many on food stamps. He conjures up a vision of the US I can't think they'll like either. My guess is he was trying to get them to give him money -- for he was saying how hard it was for him to win, and implying things like they have to suppress the vote.

I've now been told that it was Jimmy Carter's grandson who convinced the waiter who taped Romney to release the tape to Mother Jones, and Carter petit-fils learned about this on twitter.


Edited at 2012-09-20 12:11 am (UTC)
Sep. 20th, 2012 12:15 am (UTC)

Rob thinks it won't [hurt Romney permanently for the election]. But then again, he denies that there are voters out there that haven't subconsciously chosen even if they pretend to be "undecided."

Me: In this week's Progressive Populist Michael Moore has the lead column in which he warns that Romney could _still_ win. Romney has done himself damage. At a minimum my cousin Richard will now stay home. He can't get himself to vote for Obama, but neither can he get himself to vote for this man. Many veterans are dependent on gov't "handouts." 47% -- that's a lot of people to insult and dismiss. Mom

Sep. 20th, 2012 09:41 pm (UTC)
The economist
In fact, Romney's numbers are wrong:


Sep. 22nd, 2012 03:28 am (UTC)
Somehow, this embarrassing, cringe-worthy episode on the part of a man running for the presidency seems a women's issue to me.

First, on the tape, he knows who is audience is--he's the wannabe
nerdy guy desperate to impress the BMOCs--he might as well have been
telling them in similarly callous tones about how he "made" his
girlfriend the night before.

Second, the setting of this $50K a plate fundraiser was apparently a pool at a person's home where people were cavorting naked while scantily-clad Russian dancers (I assume women?) performed on platforms. Now, far be it for me to ever challenge anyone's inalienable right "to do what they want with their money,"even should that be buy tanks of water and pour it out in front of
parched people dying of thirst, but some might find it in questionable taste for the "job creators" to be cavorting about in swimming pools surrounded by dancers, naked or not, while their fellow Americans are bankrupted, thrown out of their houses, jobless, sick without health insurance, crippled in endless wars, etc. at a fundraiser to decide the future of America.

It wasn't just any party. It was a party about deciding who runs the country. But at the very least, the Russian dancers, by which I assume the newspapers meant immigrants who can find no other work than to dance scantily clad around highly entitled men (dangerous work, imho, especially should all abortion rights be stripped away as some would wish) should give us pause and some insight into the "job opportunities " in store for women should the wrong people get into power.
Sep. 22nd, 2012 03:28 am (UTC)
You added to my knowledge. I didn't know this fund raiser included stripped Russian dancers. I assumed the cell phone film was achieved by a waiter. Standing around and serving all these super-rich people were large numbers of people making minimum wage whose ideas and presence and reality were ignored. It's a good comeuppance that one of them filmed the event. That it took so long to surface suggests the person was afraid. I've heard it surfaced through a tweet that President Carter's grandson saw.
( 12 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

October 2019


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow