Next time you see a homeless person...
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,430
...tell him or her, "You'll be OK, Mitt's not worried." Get a load of this bunk:
http://news.yahoo.com/romney-im-not-con ... 59270.html
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Wednesday that he's "not concerned about the very poor" because they have an "ample safety net" and he's focused instead on relieving the suffering of middle-class people hit hard by the bad economy.
http://news.yahoo.com/romney-im-not-con ... 59270.html
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Wednesday that he's "not concerned about the very poor" because they have an "ample safety net" and he's focused instead on relieving the suffering of middle-class people hit hard by the bad economy.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
"Try to not spook the horse."
-Neil Young
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
in fairness he did say he wasn't concerned about the very rich either. Hopefully meaning he won't use government policy to indeed make them richer but force them to work hard for it.
but really, in a campaign that is probably a good thing to say. there are definitely more that consider themselves middle class than very rich and very poor. And as much as people want to say they care, most people are ultimately worried about themselves and their situation before others.
But I think you and I can agree...we are all much poorer for having heard him sing the high notes in America the Beautiful.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
"I'm concerned about the very heart of America, the 90-95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling."
he is a success probably because he knows how to focus on the biggest problems and not let the tail wag the dog.
WOOT
True, mikepegg44. It just seemed really tactless to seem callous about the very poor. I've actually met very poor people who are content to be so but they are by far the exception. We need politicians that not only take action, but that are self-aware enough to know how to speak with concern to all of the public for whom they represent.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Americans know that our future is brighter and better than these troubled times. We still believe in the hope, the promise, and the dream of America.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
The poor are also struggling right?
It means nothing to you.
It means a lot to a lot of Americans. The ones who don't hate our country...
Mitt Romney also said this...
" So when asked will I preserve and protect a woman's right to choose? I make an unequivocal answer..YES!"
WOOT
"corporations ARE people, my friend..."
mitt romney gives no more of a shit about the poor than he does about the people he fired while at bain capital. he MADE some of those people poor...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
What exactly is this dream of America to most people anyway? A house? Material wealth? Money??
Because that dream is pretty much now nothing but a fallacy.
I think he means that it means nothing in that it is said every single fucking campaign, by every single fucking underdog candidate to try to get votes via inspiration. I wouldn't be surprised if we found a quote from Obama saying a variation of that during his campaign. Actually, I think he says it every week.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
not really. (north) america is still the land of opportunity compared to 75% of the rest of the world.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Mitt
woot
Oh yeah, like a bed in a church ward... if there's still an open bed when you get there. Like a free meal at a center that feeds the homeless... if you can get there. Like mental health clinics for the mentally ill... if you feel trusting enough of those kinds of institutions to go there for help and can figure out how to jump through all the hoops and if you are very brave or really do trust those grey institutions. Like a place to park the car you sleep in... if you're lucky enough to not get rousted by the cops or have someone try to break into your vehicle in the middle of the night.
If there's a whole in the "safety net"? When hasn't there been? Mitt doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about. I don't mean to sound arrogant, but on this subject, I do.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Your absolutely right! It just shows how out of touch he really is. I'd love to watch a reality show where Mitt has to live in the hood for 30days. No $$, no ivy leauge education, with a crap brown 91Dodge Grand Caravan. O and he has to raise a family too. Good luck buddy!
Actually what this means is "I'm going to filibuster here and blather on about some nebulous American Dream so she doesn't have time to ask me how many hundred million dollars I have stashed in my Swiss Bank Account."
The "Obama Economy."
I see.
You mean this one?
Ah.
That.
Ok, I'll bite.
Republicans had a bunch of reporters arrested yesterday because they didn't like the documentary they made about the oil industry.
Who hates our country again?
so really in my opinion maybe he slipped out loud but his statement is really nothing new if we read between the lines of every candidates spew of promices and bull crap....but yes he screwed up.
Godfather.
Seems like an empty platitude.
Seems like an empty platitude.[/quote]
So, wait a minute here folks, let me get this straight, the next time I see a homeless person im supposed to tell him the news about mitt romney?
Im quite sure they'd rather hear stories about job corps, where to get assistance, places to go to get on their feet or medical assistance, where a shelter is, buy him some food or some clothes, ask if they need a ride or some money.
Gotta luv Krugman.
Im handing out Op-Ed pages to the homeless about Mitt Romney the next time I decide to help someone.
If you’re an American down on your luck, Mitt Romney has a message for you: He doesn’t feel your pain. Earlier this week, Mr. Romney told a startled CNN interviewer, “I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there.”
Faced with criticism, the candidate has claimed that he didn’t mean what he seemed to mean, and that his words were taken out of context. But he quite clearly did mean what he said. And the more context you give to his statement, the worse it gets.
First of all, just a few days ago, Mr. Romney was denying that the very programs he now says take care of the poor actually provide any significant help. On Jan. 22, he asserted that safety-net programs — yes, he specifically used that term — have “massive overhead,” and that because of the cost of a huge bureaucracy “very little of the money that’s actually needed by those that really need help, those that can’t care for themselves, actually reaches them.”
This claim, like much of what Mr. Romney says, was completely false: U.S. poverty programs have nothing like as much bureaucracy and overhead as, say, private health insurance companies. As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has documented, between 90 percent and 99 percent of the dollars allocated to safety-net programs do, in fact, reach the beneficiaries. But the dishonesty of his initial claim aside, how could a candidate declare that safety-net programs do no good and declare only 10 days later that those programs take such good care of the poor that he feels no concern for their welfare?
Also, given this whopper about how safety-net programs actually work, how credible was Mr. Romney’s assertion, after expressing his lack of concern about the poor, that if the safety net needs a repair, “I’ll fix it”?
Now, the truth is that the safety net does need repair. It provides a lot of help to the poor, but not enough. Medicaid, for example, provides essential health care to millions of unlucky citizens, children especially, but many people still fall through the cracks: among Americans with annual incomes under $25,000, more than a quarter — 28.7 percent — don’t have any kind of health insurance. And, no, they can’t make up for that lack of coverage by going to emergency rooms.
Similarly, food aid programs help a lot, but one in six Americans living below the poverty line suffers from “low food security.” This is officially defined as involving situations in which “food intake was reduced at times during the year because [households] had insufficient money or other resources for food” — in other words, hunger.
So we do need to strengthen our safety net. Mr. Romney, however, wants to make the safety net weaker instead.
Specifically, the candidate has endorsed Representative Paul Ryan’s plan for drastic cuts in federal spending — with almost two-thirds of the proposed spending cuts coming at the expense of low-income Americans. To the extent that Mr. Romney has differentiated his position from the Ryan plan, it is in the direction of even harsher cuts for the poor; his Medicaid proposal appears to involve a 40 percent reduction in financing compared with current law.
So Mr. Romney’s position seems to be that we need not worry about the poor thanks to programs that he insists, falsely, don’t actually help the needy, and which he intends, in any case, to destroy.
Still, I believe Mr. Romney when he says he isn’t concerned about the poor. What I don’t believe is his assertion that he’s equally unconcerned about the rich, who are “doing fine.” After all, if that’s what he really feels, why does he propose showering them with money?
And we’re talking about a lot of money. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, Mr. Romney’s tax plan would actually raise taxes on many lower-income Americans, while sharply cutting taxes at the top end. More than 80 percent of the tax cuts would go to people making more than $200,000 a year, almost half to those making more than $1 million a year, with the average member of the million-plus club getting a $145,000 tax break.
And these big tax breaks would create a big budget hole, increasing the deficit by $180 billion a year — and making those draconian cuts in safety-net programs necessary.
Which brings us back to Mr. Romney’s lack of concern. You can say this for the former Massachusetts governor and Bain Capital executive: He is opening up new frontiers in American politics. Even conservative politicians used to find it necessary to pretend that they cared about the poor. Remember “compassionate conservatism”? Mr. Romney has, however, done away with that pretense.
At this rate, we may soon have politicians who admit what has been obvious all along: that they don’t care about the middle class either, that they aren’t concerned about the lives of ordinary Americans, and never were.