You have to love how the media handles gaffes. If Sarah Palin makes a gaffe— real or invented by Saturday Night Live— it’s “proof” that she’s an idiot. If Joe Biden makes a gaffe, it’s “just Joe being Joe”.
If Barack Obama slips and says in a speech, “If you have a business— you didn’t build that… someone else made that happen!”… it was taken out of context. He didn’t really mean that— he was talking about words and bridges! (Of course, that means our brilliant president— with the highest IQ of any president ever, don’t forget— has a problem with grammar… not that MSNBC would ever make that connection.)
But if Mitt Romney slips at a private fundraiser and says that the 47% who are polling for Obama are probably the ones who don’t pay income taxes— and have a dependency mentality towards government— that suddenly becomes the big focus of the campaign. It’s “proof” that he’s out of touch, proof that he isn’t cut for the Oval Office… you get the idea.
Now look: I’m not going to go out and pretend that it wasn’t a gaffe on his part— that he wasn’t making a weird connection that probably wasn’t really there to be made. It’s true, to be blunt, that a good deal of the folks who don’t pay income taxes are on the dole— and that the vast majority of folks on the dole are probably solidly in the Democrat camp. But if you want to get technical… yes, his statement wasn’t fully accurate.
Nonetheless— a few things must be kept in mind.
First— this was a private gathering. Someone took a recording of it on a cell phone— and Jimmy Carter’s son posted it online. Now, all’s fair and love in political warfare… but the fact that it was a private meeting is important. In private, when we’re among friends or allies, we say a lot of odd things— we’re less guarded over what we say. After all, Barack Obama himself said a little something four years ago along the lines of blue-collar voters being “bitter” and “clinging to their guns and their religion with antipathy towards those who aren’t like them”. But you know… why bring that up?
Second— Mitt Romney did not say, regardless of what the hacks on MSNBC claim, that he didn’t want to be the president of anything less than 100% of the American people. All he was saying was that those dependent on government will not be swayed by anything he, or the GOP, could say on self-empowerment and individualism. To be honest, that is nothing less than the truth.
Third— if you want to talk about “dividing” America… well, that’s rich, considering the nonsense coming from the Left about the evil rich, the “millionaires and billionaires” who supposedly make up the Republican base— the only ones Mitt and Paul are supposed to really care about. All Mitt did was slip and make a weird connection— in private.
Meanwhile, the Democrats are not above lying through their teeth to cause division: “Mitt Romney will raise your taxes by $2000!” (The Washington Post and Fact Check both called out “pants on fire” on that.) “Paul Ryan will end Medicare and Social Security and throw our seniors over a cliff!” (Actually, the Ryan plan exempts current retirees.) “The GOP is being obstructionist, and holding tax relief hostage until they get their breaks for Millionaires And Billionaires!” (Actually, the man most responsible for obstructionism since the 2010 election is Harry Reid, who still refuses to allow any budgets or tax bills from the House onto the Senate floor.) “The GOP is imposing a War On Women!” (Tell that to Mia Love, or Rosario Dawson, or Ann Romney, or Sarah Palin, or Susana Martinez, or Nikki Haley, or…)
And that’s before “Republicans want dirtier air, dirtier water,” “Mitt Romney killed my wife,” etc. And don’t get me started about all the alleged “code-words” that “prove” that conservatives only hate Obama because he’s black. (Frankly, Chris Matthews, if you honestly believe taking Obama to task for his endless golf games is a reference to Tiger Woods, and therefore invokes the stereotype of “sexually aggressive black men”…you’re the one who needs therapy.)
Of course, this is all emotion-driven demagoguery, meant to distract America from the real issues. Pray we don’t fall for it.
So just because Romney holds disdain for a good portion of the country /in private/, it should be okay? I’ll have some of what you’re smoking, please.
And by the way, what are these “real issues” we’re being distracted from when we’re talking about Mittens’ eligibility to run the country, hmm?
A few points:
1) Romney’s comments did NOT invoke “disdain for a good portion of the country”. His basic point was that those dependent on government would probably not be responsive to his message.
2) Mitt’s comments in no way detract from his “eligibility to run the country”, any more than, say…Ron Paul’s reassurance of a 9/11 truther–in private–that he’s one of them, but he “can’t handle the controversy”, so he doesn’t talk about it….
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57515033-503544/fact-checking-romneys-47-percent-comment/
You may want to have a look at that.
Not only does Romney think that 47% of Americans are a lost cause and will vote for Obama simply because they’re dependent on the government, but he’s also wrong.
Most of the lower-income earners are likely to vote Republican. Hmm.
Lightner, please make sure you read my stuff before you comment on it. You will note that I freely admitted that his comment wasn’t accurate, that he made a hasty link that wasn’t accurate.
You will also note my point that this sort of gaffe is made by politicians Left and Right. Again, you’re not going to tell me your beloved Ron Paul is innocent of making stupid remarks to private supporters.
My point is that Romney is out of touch with the needs of the majority of Americans. Instead of writing the mislabeled 47% of the population off as a lost cause, he should be attempting to understand and connect with them to figure out what needs to be done to make things right.
For some reason, he still believes that it’s a great thing that he’s paying 14% income tax (that we’re aware of), and I’m paying 25% income tax. Yet somehow it’s my fault for not being a millionaire? I guess I’m just not trying hard enough, and looking for enough tax loopholes.
Am I bitter? Of course, and so are the majority of Americans. If people in government, the President included, really gave a lick about the people’s problems they’d stop spending more on corporations than they do their people (http://wepartypatriots.com/wp/2012/09/21/study-u-s-spends-59-billion-on-social-welfare-92-billion-on-corporate-welfare/).
As far as the Ron Paul deal goes, you’ve been on my case about him for a long time, and while the dude may be homophobic (see: Bruno), a creationist, and old-fashioned, he certainly gives a damn about the American people, understands the problems we face, and isn’t trying to legislate his mythical morality on his constituents.
1) If Romney was as stuck on keeping “corporate welfare” as you claim, he wouldn’t have picked Paul Ryan as his VP.
2)14% income tax? Are you talking about corporate tax? Because that’s not the same. Or do you think it’s not important to encourage investments in our businesses?
Or are you talking about deductions? As Adam Carolla noted, everyone has those same deductions, they just don’t know about them.
3)Out of touch? Ron Paul, again, keeps treading the line with 9/11 truthers. Truther: “Why won’t you tell the truth about 9/11?” Ron: “Because…I can’t handle the controversy.”
4) Legislate mythical morality? Mythical morality? Lightner, I know you’ve acted anti-religion in your aritcles…but I think you should know that the vast majority of Americans belive in God. Who’s out of touch?
It seems to me that your definition of “caring about the American people” and “understanding the problems we face” is simply “having the priorities I do”.
And to be blunt–even then, Ron doesn’t seem to have the economic priorities you do. He constantly says he wants to abolsh the income tax and replace it with–his words, not mine–”nothing!” Which kinda goes against your calls for the rich paying their “fair share”. You seem to be projecting your ideas on him.
1. We’re not talking about Ryan. We’re talking about Romney. And last I checked, Romney still thinks we should lower taxes on the top earners.
2. I’m talking about the taxes that he paid in 2010 and the returns filed for 2011.
Let’s remember now that, while Adam Carolla is certainly a bastion of intelligence and understanding, he’s not the sharpest crayon in the box. Do all people have access to the same deductions? Of course. However, not everyone is in the same financial bracket to be able to take advantage of them.
3. You seem to want to bait me into a debate on 9/11 truth. What is this, the Hannity show?
4. I’m sorry, but I just can’t seem to take a guy seriously who believes in magical underwear. Doesn’t sound like the type of thing a grown man should believe in.
And while the majority of Americans may believe in some spooky father figure that lives in the sky, the majority of Americans also still believe the terrorists hate us for our freedom. Doesn’t make them right.
5. My definition of caring about the American people is putting the economy and the peoples’ well being as a top priority.
6. Ron does have the same priorities. It’s called fairness. If he wants to get rid of taxes for everyone, how’s that not fair?
You know what’s not fair? A millionaire paying less taxes than me – and countless other Americans pulling the weight of this country.
1) Good! Tax cuts for EVERYONE–not just the “rich”, unless you believe the Leftist talking point that Romney’s going to raise taxes on working families–which again, both FactCheck and the Washington post have called “bull” on.
In case you missed it, Lightner…Romney also proposes CLOSING loopholes for…wait for it…upper-income earners.
2) Again, we’re talking about the capital gains tax. First…that’s on income he’d previously paid income taxes on (at a HIGHER rate than we do) way back when, which he then invested in businesses. The capital gains tax rate HAS to be low, let investors be discouraged from investing our businesses with the funds that they NEED to grow and prosper.
3) I am referring to a…*private* comment made by Ron Paul. I do not, nor have I ever, believed that Ron is a 9/11 truther–and I don’t believe you are, either. I brought it up to point out that everyone–everyone–says wierd things in private, when talking (they believe) out of the public eye.
4) I, however, can’t take a guy seriously who is notorious for being a habitual liar. Apparently, you seem to think otherwise, as your prior article on Bill Clinton indicates.
5) And I firmly believe Mitt Romney truly cares about getting the economy back on track. He fixed up Massachusetts, remember. He fixed up the Salt Lake City Olympics.
BTW…the people’s well being? I’ll bet the vast majority of office-job-holding Americans out there owe a great deal to Staples. Sportspeople and athletes owe a lot to Sports Authority. Lower-income folks owe a lot to Burlington Coat Factory, which provides clothes, etc, for great prices.
All three companies owe their success (and frankly, their existance) to…Mitt Romney.
6) It’s great. I’m a FairTax guy, myself. My point: Ron’s plan contradicts your “tax the rich, becuase they have it better than me!” talking point. Ron doesn’t think that for a moment.
Your last statement, to be blunt, seems like your definition of fairness is “I’m suffering–so make them suffer, too!” How about instead of making others suffer, relieving *your* burden?
That’s what people like me propose–tax cuts across the board.
Ron Paul is as pro-free market as they come. He’s not one to whine about how “unfair” capitalism is. That’s one of the things I admire about him–his refusal to compromise on support for free-market economics.
BTW…just so you know…the Evil Rich you claim have it better than you? They pay the vast majority of taxes in this country.
1. Romney may not be looking to raise taxes on the lower earners, but he’s certainly seeking to lower taxes on the higher earners, which would help… who, exactly? Oh, that’s right. People like Mittens and his friends.
2. You seem to follow this strange notion that everyone in the country has the financial freedom to be an investor. You know what the majority of investors are? Rich opportunists. Know who shouldn’t be paying lower taxes than people who are actually buying goods and services with their money? Rich opportunists.
3. Know what I say in private? The same garbage I spew in public. Not everyone is as cloaked as our political system would have you believe. Here’s why I like Paul – he speaks his mind, even when he only gets 2 minutes to do so in a public forum where other speakers received exponentially more time.
He’s been right about the economy, right about the war on drugs, and right about the war on terror, and yet everyone still refers to him as “crazy uncle Ron”. Which is fine, I suppose. The Republicans are going to lose this election, and deservedly so. Romney isn’t going to beat Obama in the debates. Paul would have wiped the floor with him.
4. A habitual liar? Clinton lied about getting a blowjob from a government clerk in order to save face in front of his wife. He ran this country during the greatest economic boost of the 20th century. Just saying – I think I can forgive the man.
5. I suppose next you’re going to say that lower-income Americans owe a great deal to Walmart, eh? After all, they undercut local businesses with prices that no one can compete with, driving them out of business. They then employ the owners of those local businesses at a pittance of what’s actually livable, all while providing one of the most awful healthcare packages possible. But look at all the jobs!
Let’s all bow down to our corporate masters, shall we?
6. What we have right now is not capitalism. It’s corporatism. My “tax the rich” talking point isn’t a talking point at all. It’s common sense. If I’m giving up 25+% of my money, and the millionaires are giving up less than 15% of theirs, in what sense of the word is that fair?
And no kidding the rich pay the most in tax. When 51% of the country are too poor to even owe income tax, how is that a surprise to anyone?
Know what’s funny? How the top 1% of this country account for over 90% of the wealth distribution. Wait, that’s not funny. That’s just sad.
What I find amusing is how folks like yourself continue to defend the American aristocracy and don’t even see that you yourself are being taken advantage of.
1) Who creates the jobs in this country? Businesses. Most small business owners are over the $250,000 mark. You want to encourage job creation? Tax cuts. And make them permanent.
2, and a little of 4) Guess who cut capital gains taxes in America, which helped a great deal to BRING ABOUT the big economic boost of the 90s, due to major investment (there’s that word!) in American busness?
Bill Clinton.
4) As I keep trying to point out to you–Ron Paul played both sides with the 9/11 truthers. He tells them he’s one of them, but “can’t handle the controversy”–and tells everyone else that he’s NOT a truther.
Further, he constantly loads spending bills with pork for his district–then votes against those bills, so he can say he never voted for spending increases.
Doesn’t sound like a man of Truth, let alone someone who would’ve wiped the floor with Obama.
Rest of 4) Need I remind you that that was not the only thing he lied about?
5) Non sequiter-we’re not talking about Wal-Mart. Besides that, you’re not going to tell me Staples and Burlington Coat Factory are inherently evil, by virtue of being corporations. Are you going to say you’ve never shopped there–and that the products they sell have not benefitted your life?
BTW, I sincerely doubt Ron Paul would approve of your trashing those businesses.
6) No, it’s not common sense. Again, the income Mitt invested into companies is income he already paid income taxes on–at a HIGHER rate than you or I. The 15% is CAPITAL GAINS tax. Again–Clinton cut that, which LED TO economic growth.
Let’s look at some numbers:
The Evil Richest 1% you love to trash pays 27.5% of all taxes.
The richest 5%–45.1% of taxes.
The richest 10%–57.1%.
The top 20%–72.4%.
You want to talk to me about “distribution”? What I find amusing is that you use the term “distribution” in the first place–along with “fair”.
What you should be fighting for is tax cuts for your money, too. And as you keep ignoring…”Mittens” is going to cut taxes across the board. That…includes…you.
And again, he is looking to CLOSE loopholes on the top end.
Finally…you want to talk about ending corporatism? Ending corporate welfare was an integral part of the Ryan Plan, you might remember.
But you know…why let the facts interfere with your emotion-based rhetoric of “corporate masters” and “aristocracy” and “fairness” and “distribution”. Ron Paul would not approve.