90.9 WBUR - Boston's NPR news station
Top Stories:
PLEDGE NOW
Romney And The ‘Dependent’ 47 Percent

Mitt Romney’s tough judgment on 47 percent of America.  We’ll look at the facts and the fallout.

Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney speaks to reporters about the secretly taped video from one of his campaign fundraising events in Costa Mesa, Calif., Monday, Sept. 17, 2012. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney speaks to reporters about the secretly taped video from one of his campaign fundraising events in Costa Mesa, Calif., Monday, Sept. 17, 2012. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

Mitt Romney’s been looking for a campaign reset.  Lots of  Republicans upset this week at signs that he’s slipping in the polls.  Then – boom! – comes a bootleg video from Mother Jones, of Romney at a $50,000 a plate fundraiser in Florida, laying into nearly half of America as “dependent”, entitled “victims”.

“My job is not to worry about those people,” he says.  And now that video’s everywhere.  The White House says it’s disqualifying.  Romney stands by the substance.

This hour, On Point:  The freeloader charge.  Mitt Romney’s tough judgement on 47 percent of America.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests

Philip Rucker, national political reporter at the Washington Post.

Donald Marron, director of the Tax Policy Center, which is a joint venture of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Center.

Marcy Kaptur, Congressional representative from Ohio’s 9th district.

Stephen Moore, editorial board member and senior economics writer for the Wall Street Journal.

David Corn, Washington, D.C. bureau chief for Mother Jones.

From Tom’s Reading List

Mother Jones “When Mother Jones first disclosed secret video of Romney’s remarks, we were obliged to not reveal details regarding the time and place of the event. That restriction has been lifted, as the story has garnered attention throughout the media.”

New York Times “In a brief and hastily called news conference Monday just after 10 p.m., Mr. Romney acknowledged having made the blunt political and cultural assessment, saying it was “not elegantly stated,” but he stood by the substance of the remarks, insisting that he had made similar observations in public without generating controversy.”

Video

Here is the video that captured Mitt Romney’s controversial comments.

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on this site.
  • AC

    i’m assuming repub’s are stuck w this one……or, can they still write someone in?

    • DrewInGeorgia

      Same answer as last time question was posed: No way in hell the Cash Cow is getting traded in at this point. And what would they trade for? Trading a Gremlin for a Pinto is not trading up.

  • Mouse_2012

    This should be of no surprise, 

    It’s going to be funny to see the right try to polish this turd and call it gold .

    • Ray in VT

      Oh, I’m sure that they’ll throw plenty of shine at it.  It will also be interesting to see what other nuggets those videos contain.

      • MrNutso

        I think their plan will be to go all in.  No way take the stink off this sh!t.

      • hennorama

        Yes.  Apparently there are about 70 minutes of raw video.

        I guess the “October surprise” came a bit early this year.

        • Ray in VT

          … or Christmas if you’re in the Obama camp.

  • Mouse_2012

    Repubiclans will just change the meaning of what he said than attempt to use an False equivalence saying Obama did the same. 

    I would bet big money “Foxs” Weekly Standard” Dailycaller, and all the other rightwing hack source are doing it right now and it will be repeated and 
    repeated  and repeated once the talking point is established. Romney’s aids will want to now talk about the “Economy”

    • DrewInGeorgia

      “Repubiclans”

      Don’t know if that was a typo, it has a nice ring to it though. Republi-Clans…Just kind of rolls of the tongue.

  • Gregg Smith

    That 47% are don’t have skin in the game is a problem. The irony is they are the loudest when calling for tax hikes on everybody else.

    • Mouse_2012

      Which is it? Do republicans want to raise taxes or cut them? It’s amazing on one hand republicans are saying X amount of people don’t pay taxes(but they do) and than attack Democrats for raising peoples taxes are calling for tax cuts. 

      • Gregg Smith

        No one is calling for a tax cut but Obama is calling for a tax hike. Why should we do either?

        • Mouse_2012

          No one is calling for tax cuts? 

          misinformed much? 
          By Albert FosterProgressives have a slogan that Mitt Romney just wants tax cuts for the rich. This is a gross misrepresentation. Actually, Romney has proposed a 20 percent tax cut for everyone 
          OPINION: Romney calling for tax cuts for all
          http://www.pressandguide.com/articles/2012/09/15/opinion/doc504f366eeff48764186502.txt 

          Answer my question if 47% Americans don’t pay taxes and democrats wouldn’t raise them will republican raise taxes on the 47%?  If democrats are the ones who raise taxes are republicans defending the 47% who don’t pay taxes?

          Why is Romney calling for cutting taxes on people who already pay no taxes? 

          • Gregg Smith

            His is an entire restructuring of the tax code, it can hardly be honestly characterized as a tax cut.

          • Don_B1

            A “restructuring” where the numbers don’t add up?

            The tax cut comes first and then the cuts in the safety net, particularly Medicaid, which pays for a lot of seniors in nursing homes, and then, wait till we see what loopholes are “eliminated,” closed or what, especially those that affect people below $250,000.

            What will the public think about how Romney will work this out, particularly given the Tea/Republicans in the House?

        • sickofthechit

           Deficit!

    • Ray in VT

      Yeah, those old people living on Social Security or the low income earners working at the Sports Authority sure have it easy.  What they really need is to start paying their fair share of income taxes, on top of the other various state and/or federal taxes that they do pay.

      • Gregg Smith

        You are recasting the reality into an emotional plea. Do you think it’s healthy for nearly half not to pay income tax? Do you realize there is a consorted effort to increase that percentage?

        • Mouse_2012

          So your advocating for raising taxes on half of america? Romney advocating raising taxes on half of america? What about Bush the 2nd bragging about taking 5 million off the tax rolls ?

          • Gregg Smith

            Where did Romney (or I) advocate raising taxes? 

          • jefe68

            Are you asleep or what?
            So the GW Bush tax cuts were not tax cuts?

            Because they were and are tax cuts that Mitt Romney wants to make permanent and he wants to lower the tax rate to 20%.

            He also wants to eliminate the estate tax, taxes on dividends and a lot of other taxes that people in the top 20 to .01% pay.

            In short his policies will bankrupt our nation, that’s a given.

            I don’t make a huge salary and I pay income taxes.  I do get something
            back every year but I’m forking over about 28% of my gross income in
            taxes for both federal and state. Everyone I know is paying taxes so I’m
            guessing this number is fudged or misleading.

            By the way this is not about the 47% it’s about what an ass Mitt Romney is being revealed to be. He’s not fit to be president.

             Mouse_2012 has already asked the
            conflicting ideology on taxes that the right wing regressives have, that
            all of you don’t seem to know which end of the tax argument to be on.

          • Ray in VT

            So, then how do we get more people to have skin in the game without having them pay anything into the system?

          • Don_B1

            You get more pay into their hands!

        • Ray in VT

          No, I am not.  Please, tell me how much more skin in the game a retiree living on Social Security needs.  How much income tax should they pay on that Social Security check.  If someone is making $10 bucks an hour working 40 hours per week and trying to support let’s say two adults and a child, then how much more skin in the game do they need?  Such a scenario would produce a situation where income tax liability would be close to zero, although they would pay payroll taxes.  Would such people not have skin in the game?

          I do not think that it is healthy for an increasingly massive percentage of the nation’s wealth to be concentrated into fewer and fewer hands, as it has for the past 30 years.  I do not think that it is healthy to have a substantial portion of the population having their wealth and earnings in real dollars declining for 30 years.

          Is there a concerted effort to increase that percentage?  Maybe.  Is that percentage a reflection that an increasing percentage of the American population, especially the working poor, are far worse off after three decades of trickle down than they were during the 1970s?  Definitely.

          Given that the working poor pay payroll taxes and various consumption taxes, especially as groceries are taxed in some states, then how much income tax should they pay, especially considering the fact that top tier income tax rates are historically low?

          • Don_B1

            Thank you; you provided the other part of my argument on why there needs to be a higher minimum wage which will benefit all workers.

          • Gregg Smith

            Abolish the minimum wage.

          • Don_B1

            To enable the “Masters of Industry” to totally exploit the workers? Or are you vigorously supporting unions?

          • Gregg Smith

            Yes you are. Nearly half the country is not made up of those you describe. If you are worried about the elderly then get behind Romney who will save medicare rather than gut it.  

          • Ray in VT

            I assert that I do not, although I did neglect to mention active military.  Here is what I found about that 47%, although I do think that one of today’s guests also had a breakdown:

            More than 1/2 are elderly

            Over one-third are nonelderly with income under $20,000

            Only about 1 in 20 is nonelderly with income over $20,000

            http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/federal-taxes-households.cfm

          • Don_B1

            Here is an insightful way to view the issue of who pays taxes:

            http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2012/09/nontaxpayers-are-overwhelmingly-the-eldery-and-students.html

            It is a shame that Gregg will ignore it as he is not here to learn.

          • Ray in VT

            It is interesting to look at a breakdown of the numbers.  Mostly the old who’ve mostly been working and paying into the system for decades and the young, who may be in school and haven’t fully gotten into the labor market yet.

          • Don_B1

            Romney will follow Ryan’s transformation of Medicare into vouchercare, which is NOT “saving it.”

            All The R/R plan will do is throw seniors without thousands of extra dollars to supplement the “voucher” to pay for a healthcare policy “under the bus.” The current Medicare does NOT do that.

            Are you going to make seniors struggling with senility read all kinds of fine print from 10 or more insurers to determine which is best for them? And what happens when they make a real bad decision as a result?

            Or will you just give them a euthanasia option?

            Please get real!

        • Don_B1

          Just who are you “consorting” with today?

          Did you get your talking points last night?

          Those people that do not pay income tax are in that state because they don’t have much income and pay a lot of other taxes and fees, which make up a much bigger portion of their income than they do for those who do pay federal income taxes.

          It certainly is healthy to lift the tax burden from those who earn less than $25,000 a year with a family. I certainly cannot imagine living on that with a family and trying to get the children a decent education so they could earn more in their lives.

          When there is a much higher minimum wage and protection for unions which did so much to create a healthy middle class, then there will not be that many people not paying federal income taxes. When CEOs do not make 500 times the average worker’s wage in the company then there will be a lot more workers paying income tax.

          Note that there was no stronger advocate of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC)

          But the majority of senior citizens will probably always be poor enough to not pay income taxes and cutting Medicaid will make them a majority of the poor like they were before Social Security gave them a chance for a dignified old age.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1294364680 Brent Coulthard

       Which statement perpetuates the misunderstanding, o.k. misinformation, about the composition of the “47%”, and elides the truth of who the greatest share of recipients of aid are: the ones grumbling the most about it!  The right is clotted with craven hypocrites

    • MrNutso

      Only about 18% of American households paid no federal income or payroll taxes.
      http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/09/who-exactly-are-the-47-percent.html 

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      You really ought to get out more.

    • DrewInGeorgia

      Don’t have skin in the game? The only thing many of us still have in The Game is our Skin. And Slavery was abolished…pft.

    • hennorama

      I’m just gonna repost comments I made recently:

      ” I feel an obligation to add something to this discussion of who pays Federal income taxes (FIT), and who does not.

      To begin with, let’s be sure we understand the terms being used.  It is more precise to use “those who have income” rather than “taxpayers” or even “tax filers.”

      The figure most commonly cited as “nearly half” is 46%.  Let’s call them “the 46%.”

      Next, no one votes on taxes directly.  Congress makes tax laws, not the voters and not the President, either.

      Of those who have income, many of the 46% who pay no FIT are either the youngest or oldest among us.  They are either just entering the workforce and economy, or have worked and contributed to the economy for most of their lives.

      Each year, there are also over 1,000 people with income over $1,000,000 who pay no Federal income tax.

      Amongst the 46%, half have income so low that they owe no FIT after they subtract their standard deduction and exemptions.

      The other half of the 46% qualify for various tax breaks, both non-refundable and refundable, resulting in no net FIT.

      Just wanted to make sure we have common terms and facts, nothing more.  I make no comment on the merits of the above.

      [EDIT]: One additional point about your #(5) Let’s assume the answer is “Yes, everyone should pay at least one dollar
      ($1) in tax.”

      First, we would need to define “everyone.” Do you mean every person living in the US? Every citizen? Everyone over the age of 12? What happens if I fit the definition and I have negative income (a loss)?

      OK, so let’s say this is defined in some way. It starts to get wobbly at the extremes. What happens if I’m part of “everyone”, and my income is $1, or $10, or $100?
      Should I still pay my $1?”

      • Don_B1

        Your points are nicely captured in the graph contained here:

        http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2012/09/nontaxpayers-are-overwhelmingly-the-eldery-and-students.html

        along with additional information.

        One point is that the current 46.x% is higher than usual because of the lingering effects of the Great Recession.

        I listened in amazement as Tom debated Steven Moore as that slick BS slinger went down the Gish Gallop debate tactic road on how he is using temporary values generated by the GR as if they are “permanent.”

        This is something that Republicans use all too effectively with those that are not familiar with their arguments and don’t go back and reevaluate them, which few do.

        This is probably to late to catch those types but if you and others who do or have noted this bring it up in the future when appropriate, I think it could help? I try but do not get to as much as necessary.

  • Denis

    Please ask David Corn if he thinks the part of the tape picked up by the media to kick around [the 47% issue] is the most damaging of all the info on the tape… How about the comment about if he were Hispanic, how about his put down of his own wife [don’t want the voters to tire of her] and the question of inheritance [did his family really leave him nothing]?

    • jiminboston

       There are also his remarks about visiting a Chinese sweat shop that Bain was investing in and just accepting the officials story that the barbed wire fences and guards were to keep people out rather than to keep the workers in.

    • MrNutso
    • sickofthechit

       No they did not leave him nothing.  Remember his wife saying that when they were first married and living in the basement they experienced hard times and had to sell some of their stock!  I am not making this up.  I guess the dividends weren’t quite enough to cover day to day…

  • Shag_Wevera

    The sheer contempt that Romney shows for almost half of Americans is stunning.

    Do any of you 47% believe he will represent your interests if he wins in November?

    • Mouse_2012

      On top the guy doesn’t even may 15% of his own taxes, maybe it’s some voodoo thing were he will later come out saying he’s part of that 47% where he didn’t pay any taxes for 10 years(wink,wink)

  • Mouse_2012

    Oh yeah,

    Don’t forget Bush the 2nd bragged about taking 5 million Americans off of the tax rolls guest what Congressman running for VP voted for it???

  • madnomad554

    Just to be clear, as we all should realize that stats and numbers and sound bites can be askew due to lack of info. But to say that 47% of Americans don’t pay taxes, is that 47% of all Americans(310 million) or is that 47% of those who receive a paycheck?

    I’m pretty sure your five year old or your 90 year old grandmother shouldn’t be paying taxes, unless they receive earned wages.

    Am I missing something here???

    • jefe68

      No, it’s based on what people payed in income taxes and the deductions they received. Such as mortgage and child deductions. This 47% thing is very misleading and it also does not take into account that everyone is paying something such as FICA and state taxes.

      The bottom line is it shows up Mitt Romney for what he is, as real jerk.

      • madnomad554

         No doubt there are some who milk the system and that’s as bad as non-citizen illegal immigrants receiving government help.

        I guess I must be part of this 47% problem, as I am a combat veteran. Nine surgeries and more to come, for I will in the next couple of years receive an artificial right shoulder joint. Since I don’t pay taxes on my VA compensation…I must be part of the problem. 

        • jefe68

          I don’t think so. You have already payed with a lot more than most do.
          I do get your point and here in lies the rub about all of this. It’s complicated.

          To me this is about Mitt Romney and not taxes. I speaks volumes to his character and his inability to have any empathy for anyone. He is the chair Clint Eastwood was talking to at the GOP convention. How fitting.

          • madnomad554

             Oh let me be clear, my previous comment is dripping with sarcasm.

        • agavegirl

          Absolutely you blood-sucking leech.  

    • Don_B1

      Federal income taxes are based on wages plus unearned income from stock dividends or sales and income from a non-Roth IRA.

  • StilllHere

    It’s also about taking responsibility for yourself and ending multi-generational dependency.  Democrats blame others for all their problems and want the government to be their nanny, demanding somebody else pay for it all. 

    • Mouse_2012

      Yet it’s RedStates who often received the most tax dollars from the Nanny State. 

      • adks12020

        absolutely right…and by a huge margin.

      • StilllHere

        Please, I live in a redstate that has a single large urban area that sucks the lifeblood out of the rest of the state and the federal government due to its incompetence and the total control of the Democrat party. 

        • jefe68

          What a load of bunk. If you live in a Red State that means it’s controlled by a republican governor and legislators. Which mean they control the purse strings.

          This is a very good example of how the regressive right twist everything into falsehoods and out right lies. It also points to your complete lack of understanding how taxes on a local level work.
          It would stand to reason that a large city, say Atlanta, would need more revenue due to the very nature of running it. Your statement also alludes to a lack of understanding on how local taxes work in congress with state and federal.

    • adks12020

      That’s funny because every Democrat that I know has a full time job and doesn’t depend on the government for anything.  I know far more Republicans that take government assistance than democrats….there’s also, as Mouse said below, the fact that the most conservative states take more per capita assistance than the more liberal leaning states.

      • totalbangover

        It’s only anecdotal but I have had the same experience with dem vs. rep friends…

    • jefe68

      I guess all those red states should take your advise.
      Including Paul Ryan who asked for some stimulus money as he was making nasty statements about it.

    • AC

      those ‘dependents’ include active duty military. what exactly are you saying?
      do you mean corporate welfare for millions or the single mothers welfare for milk?

  • JGC

    Favorite Lincoln quotes of the candidates -

    Obama’s: “I have been driven many times to my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go.”

    Romney’s:  ”…this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of tax cuts that government of the 53%, by the 53%, for the 53%, shall not perish from our gated communities.”

    Or something like that.

  • Gregg Smith

    Commenters regularly pine for the days of Clinton’s tax rates or better yet Eisenhower’s. 47% don’t pay income tax but that number was below 30% when Clinton was elected and 34.1% in 2000 when he left office. In 1962, 23.7% did not pay income tax. You guys have gotten exactly what you want from the tax cuts as you decry them.

    • Shag_Wevera

      How much revenue can you extract from say, the bottom 20% of wage earners?  Should “skin in the game” keep you from having shoes on your feet or food in your mouth?

      • Gregg Smith

        I’m okay letting the bottom 20% slide.

    • Don_B1

      The change in the percentage not paying federal income taxes in Clinton’s administration was due to the extension of the EITC, which complemented the Welfare Reform that helped send people from welfare to work.

  • William

    Wow..this is more important than the Fed printing money like crooks in the night? 

    • Shag_Wevera

      Yes, yes it is.  We are finally getting to the heart of the matter.  An open discussion that needs to be had.

    • jefe68

      The Fed does not print money and they are buying securities and US treasury bonds. Are you really this ill-informed on how the Fed works?

      • William

         The Fed isn’t literally printing $100 dollar bills when it does this.
        But it is creating money, electronically, that wasn’t in the financial
        system before. In that sense, it is printing money.

    • StilllHere

      It allows Obama to keep growing his deficits so he can pay for votes.

  • Shag_Wevera

    Going to be a hot topic today, because Romney’s statements are the beginning of taking the gloves off in terms of class warfare.  I say let’s have at it!  An open discussion of the haves versus the have nots in America, when much of the poulation is engaged in the discussion, cannot end well for conservatives.

    One side wants food, shelter, education, healthcare, and old-age insurance.  The other side wants the freedom to be as rich as they wanna be.  Who are the good guys and bad guys in this conflict?

    I am a radical when it comes to class war.  Take Mitt for example.  His worth is 250 million.  I’d confiscate 240 million of that and use it for infrastructure and college tuition for poor kids.  Mitt would be left to chart his life course with only 10 million dollars.  But that’s just me, and I’m a class warfare radical.

    • notafeminista

      No.  Both sides want food, shelter,education, healthcare and old age insurance.  One side wants the other to pay for it.

      • Ray in VT

        Yeah, places like Mississippi and Alabama just want New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts to pay for it.  The nerve of those red states.

        • notafeminista

          Ah..interesting point.  Mississippi and Alabama tried to leave a long time ago only to be dragged back by New York and Connecticut who then ravaged Mississippi and Alabama’s landscapes destroying entire livelihoods,communities and families. Then New York and Connecticut shoved as much government “help” down the throats of Alabama and Mississippi  as they could stand. All because Mississippi and Alabama didn’t “progress” as fast as New York and Connecticut thought they should.

          Talk about nerve.

          • Ray in VT

            Yup, those damned Yankees should have let the Union dissolve and leave the South to continue it’s peculiar institution for as long as it wanted.  In retrospect, I would have let ‘em go.  They’re a drain on America as far as I’m concerned.

            So, it’s the South that’s the victim of northern help.  If only the south hadn’t been oppressed for generations by northern government assistance, then I’m sure that they’d be fabulously wealthy entrepreneurs paradises by now.  Your logic is cracked to say the least.  Let ‘em get off the dole now.  They can start today as far as I’m concerned.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            Lemme guess: You don’t think it was about slavery, do you.

            Nuff ced.

  • http://www.facebook.com/abbe.dalton Abbe Dalton Clark

    The NYT has an item describing what they define as that 47% (actually 46% according to the article). It is households, which is how income tax is assessed, so the number could refer to a single earner, a family with kids, or a home with seniors or someone on disability. Some of those people are paying FICA taxes, most pay local/state sales taxes, and a percentage get back everything withheld and receive money on top of that through the Earned Income Tax Credit. What I don’t understand is Romney’s assumption that all of those same people are receiving food, shelter, and other handouts financed by taxpayers. I would like to see the statistics on what those who don’t pay income taxes receive from the taxes of others as a matter of curiosity. I do not care for Romney, and I am one of those independents he mentions who “just doesn’t like the guy,” but I do agree that those who are going to see a reduction or elimination of resources will probably not vote for someone who makes that happen. Of the many things I fault him for, knowing who his supporters are or are not isn’t one of them.

    • Don_B1

      While it is on a different issue, Romney’s response to those who sought a meeting with him after the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court had removed the prohibition on same-sex marriages and Romney had indicated he would support a constitutional amendment to prohibit it, Romney received several people seeking the right to marry and in responses indicated that he had not listened to them nor had he done any investigation of  the privations that not being able to have the legal system’s blessing on their life partnerships. See:

      http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/blogs/bostonspirit/2012/09/romney_a_wimp_not_so_much_acco.html

      This shows Romney’s arrogance and total lack of empathy for those whose life circumstances are different from his.

  • pamajoh

    Thank you Mother Jones!

  • DrewInGeorgia

    Apparently no matter what this clown does or says many will continue their march toward self-destruction. Nothing shocking in Romney calling a large percentage of Americans parasites, right? Hey geniuses who are still waving his standard, you do realize he is talking about you don’t you? You think you’re one of his buddies? You think he’s going to invite you out to the show and shower you with gifts? The man could evidently come over to your home, take a dump on the hood of your car, slap your spouse, and spit on your baby and still be your hero. Talk about being conditioned, keep pounding those ‘like’ pedals puppets.

  • JGC

    Tax loss carry forward.  This is how hedge fund managers, mega real estate moguls and financiers avoid paying any tax at all on the already meager tax rate they are supposed to pay on their sole income of capital gains. Romney, you and four of your five sons are part of the 47% moochers.  We would probably be able to see this more explicitly if he would release the tax documents he has been shielding pre-2011.

    • StilllHere

      Except first you have to get the loss so where’s the free lunch?
      How much does the universe of hedge fund managers earn?
      Moreover, they also pay sales tax, property tax, state income tax, city income tax …

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6U4S4DRZE2PBHJ7NI25KQ5QIPU Aubrey

        so do the rest of us.

      • jefe68

        So do the rest of us. You really are clueless.

      • Mike_Card

        Non-cash deductions.

    • Ray in VT

      One of my buddies used to do the taxes for some NHL players.  During the time that he did them the league minimum salary was $450,000, and he said that his firm could work the tax code so that they didn’t pay any federal income taxes.

      • madnomad554

         Well when it comes to pro athletes, all of the league minimums are close to and around 1/2 million per year. They are the so called 1%, created by the so called 99%.

        The fans themselves are responsible for their ridiculous salaries. Turn on the TV, but the jersey and but a ticket to the game and there you go, the creation of the 1%. Why doesn’t the Occupy Wallstreeters complain about this 1% also…oh because they probably caught them game themselves. 

  • NrthOfTheBorder

    It’s not like this 47% is unemployed, loafing around & standing in line at gov’t food banks – which is where Romney was hoping to connect with the sentiments of his audience. 

    We shouldn’t be surprised because wild  generalizations and vague distinctions have been the hallmark of Romney’s campaign from the beginning.

    But what comes out in these un-guarded moments is a man who’s drunk the kool-aid… who really believes this stuff and is fool enough to think it won’t cost him big-time.

  • Gregg Smith

    I’ve always love this analogy, it’s perfect:

    http://www.citydebate.com/florida/miamibeach/stories/0104150710.htm

  • StilllHere

    It’s time to broaden the base.  Confiscating hard earned wealth and income from those who have always worked hard and have saved is only enabling those who see no value in education, effort and independence and would rather buy into the victim mentality that permeates Democrat fundamentals.

    • jefe68

      If you look a taxes as confiscating money then you’re a hopeless fool and should really think about moving to a country that is more in tune to your ideology, say Somalia.

  • notafeminista

    The interesting thing is, he’s right.  Candidate Romney, President Obama, nor anyone else will convince the 47% to take care and responsibility for their own lives.  That is true.  There is no point trying to convince the 47% otherwise because no one can make someone else change.  

    It is that type of thinking that permits an adult child to stay on his or her parents’ insurance plan until the age of 26.  It is that type of thinking that tries to convince taxpayers that education and healthcare are “free” even while reaching into  taxpayers’ wallets and purses to pay for the “free” service. 

    It is the thinking that permits the EITC to exist.  It is the thinking that removes responsibility (“forgives”) student loan debt after 20 years if said loan has not been paid off.   It is the thinking that comes up with twelve reasons why a person cannot accomplish “x” and not one reason why they can.

    • StilllHere

      It’s also why we have proposals for uniform principal reductions on mortgages. 

    • Shag_Wevera

      So no one in that 47% lives a responsible life, raises good children, obeys the law, fights and dies in our military?  A full 150 million americans are full blown moochers who make no positive contibution?

      What a terrible burden you bear, carrying all us along.

      • notafeminista

        Hi.  I’m the US debt.  Have we met?

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

          Ooh, time for a meeting of all the TruePrincipledConservatives, who were screaming themselves hoarse about the debt before Obama was inaugurated.

          I’m sure there’s a Fotomat you can all meet in. For all the fascination the mainstream press feels about saying “both side”, you don’t statistically exist.

    • jefe68

      It’s your type of thinking that has no empathy for people who are in need. It’s your kind of thinking that leeds to a society that is a world ruled by social Darwinism.

      These folks don’t make much or they are the elderly or in the military. You really do not know what you are talking about.

      • notafeminista

        You know you’re right.  I think we should keep permitting Grandma to have her Social Security garnished because Jr. defaulted on the student loan she co-signed for.  So much better.

  • J__o__h__n

    It was nice for him to quantify exactly what percentage of Americans he has contempt for (including soldiers and seniors).  Was there a PowerPoint slide too? 

  • Shag_Wevera

    BTW, Romney is completely wrong about the 47%.  I know many of these people who vote republican because of abortion or guns or the idea that they will eventually be a 1%er.

  • J__o__h__n

    I pay federal income tax, don’t get food stamps, and will be voting against Mitt. 

    • MrNutso

      Federal income tax, federal payroll taxes, state income tax, local income tax, property taxes and sales tax and voting against Mitt.

    • Shag_Wevera

      I bet Warren Buffet votes against him.

  • JGC

    Carried interest loophole.  This is how hedge fund managers avoid paying taxes on what is clearly earned income, by applying their trickle-down voodoo on their earnings and -voila!- it is now magically taxed at the lower capital gains rate. Apply a rinse of tax loss carry forward, and they can pay even less than that. 

    • TribalGuitars

      Money’s money.  It spends the same.  If anything, unearned money should be taxed less, since people actually did something to earn it, and didn’t sit on their laurels and moved money from one money making scheme to another money making scheme, none of which produces anything but more money. Not a product, not jobs, just money. And for this they get to keep more of it? How’s that fair to those 99% that work way too hard for way too little, breaking their backs supporting the tax breaks for the 1% and plutocrats.

       Next there will be lobbying for people to buy anything tax-free if it was paid for with unearned income.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6U4S4DRZE2PBHJ7NI25KQ5QIPU Aubrey

    well, I pay taxes (tyically get less than a few hundred of the few thousand I pay in every year and that has only been because of student loans I take out every year) and I am on the side you apparently categorize as ‘wants the other to pay for it.’ I would be one of those people paying for it, so quit your boo hooing like everyone who is poor wants a hand out. The people in this country who are smart realize you’re only as strong as your weakest link, and the number of our weak links is increasing exponentially.

  • StilllHere

    And the media’s free pass for Obama continues …

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443995604578000754035510658.html

    • jefe68

      Stop whining.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Is this a surprise to anyone?  Apparently O’Really and other Republic talk show hosts — I’ll leave that typo back there — have been talking about the 47 percent victims, entitled victims, for a decade.  
         In my experience struggling to stay just with my head about the tsunami of government-controlled and government-regulated “services,” it seems in a very visceral way that the Republican compassionate conservatism is absolutely designed to drive more and more people into that category.  ”I owe my soul to the company store,” so goes the song.  Here, you may owe it to the government; you may owe it to the bank, but if people are trapped in underwater mortgaged homes, Romney seems to think great, it’s their problem, they can stay put.  If people are dependent on government for food, shelter, health care, they can be pushed around very easily, for votes, or for being made to buy this or that, all sorts of things.  (I see this as a Republican accomplishment, not Democratic, but the parties merge in my mind; both having designs designed by K Street to some extent.)  There becomes a class of people who have minimal liberty, minimal choice except to remain “victims.”  
        If the Republicans really wanted people to get into a more self-sufficient state, what would they do?  Tax the bejeezus out of the people with their heads just above water, as I described it above?  At about $50,000, if you don’t have children or a mortgage, if you have expenses the Congress hasn’t seen a lobbyist for, you can feel you are holding up the universe, not just at home, but in Egypt, Israel, Sierra Leone, everyplace — percentage-wise.  Is this the 5 percent Romney is trying to win over?  Lots of luck with that, buddy.  Lots of luck.  We’ll keep trucking, but just because nobody else seems to be doing so.

  • StilllHere
    • jefe68

      To bad. Mitt Romney has proven he’s not fit to be president of the US. He’s the empty chair.

  • TribalGuitars

    Mitt needs to release his recipe for the sauce that tastes so good in his foot makes that foot he keeps sticking it in his mouth repeatedly. 

    As the saying goes : A gaffe is what a politician says when they say what they really think.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=584989777 Brian P. Kasso Gaidry

    So much in this one video, but let’s go right to the main event, the 47% who don’t pay any INCOME taxes. Of that 47%, nearly two-thirds pay PAYROLL taxes. The other third is largely made up of the elderly surviving solely or primarily on social security which they already paid into – so you can’t call it an entitlement, and non elderly people whose annual income is less than $20,000. How much revenue can you expect to extract from the bottom 20% of wage earners? As someone else in the forum said, “Should “skin in the game” keep them from having shoes on their feet or food in their mouths?”

    Ironically, about 1% of those who pay no income tax are neither elderly or impoverished. They are in fact THE 1% of OWS fame, who evade taxation through loopholes and lobbyists that give tax breaks for things like private jets and dancing horses.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romneys-47-who-are-dependent-on-the-government-2012-9?fb_action_ids=10151439948564778&fb_action_types=og.recommends&fb_source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582

  • StilllHere
  • StilllHere
    • jefe68

      Stop whining.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=584989777 Brian P. Kasso Gaidry

    Ironically, the states with the most people who pay no income tax are the southern states, with large poor and elderly populations who typically vote republican.

    Until now, anyway.

    http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/09/did-romney-just-lose-the-election.html

  • StilllHere

    This is not a new debate, this reflects where the parties already are.  Republicans are for independence and Democrats are for dependence.  A recent Gallup poll
    shows that 82% of Republicans think government is doing too much; 15%
    think it should do more.  62% of Independents think government is
    doing too much; 29% think it should do more.  24% of Democrats
    think government is doing too much; 67% want government to do more.

    This is not a new debate, this reflects where the parties already are.  Republicans are for independence and Democrats are for dependence.  A recent Gallup poll
    shows that 82% of Republicans think government is doing too much; 15%
    think it should do more.  62% of Independents think government is
    doing too much; 29% think it should do more.  24% of Democrats
    think government is doing too much; 67% want government to do more.

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/157481/majority-say-government-doing.aspx

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=584989777 Brian P. Kasso Gaidry

      Correction, Republicans are for the ILLUSION of independence. They are actually for privatized profits, externalized costs and socialized losses and corporate welfare.

      Yes democrats do the same. The difference is Republicans GIVE it all away to the wealthy elite, while Democrats SURRENDER it away to the wealthy elite.

    • Shag_Wevera

      “Too much” in this example means too much to help the poor, sick, and elderly.  It doesn’t mean too much military buildup and intervention.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=584989777 Brian P. Kasso Gaidry

    But there were other gems in the leaked video we should not
    miss. Such as Mitt’s claim to be a self made man which is refuted by his own wife.

    “I have inherited nothing. There is a perception, ‘Oh, we were born with a silver spoon, he never had to earn anything and so forth.’” – Mitt Romney

    “They were not easy years… Neither one of us had a job, because Mitt had enough of an investment from stock that we could sell off a little at a time. The stock came from Mitt’s father.” – Ann Romney

  • NewtonWhale

    I am looking forward to the campaign ad with Romney saying: 
    “All right — there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent on government, who believe that, that they are victims, who believe that government has the responsibility to care for them.  “[M]y job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives,”  Followed by the response of a retiree and disabled veteran in a wheelchair: ”Mr. Romney, you’re wrong. I took personal responsibility and worked hard all my life. When America was attacked I left my family and volunteered to fight for my country to keep you and your family safe. Now I’m living on veterans’ benefits and social security. But you are right about one thing: I AM voting for President Obama, because he understands that we need a President who cares about ALL Americans.”

    Stick a fork in him, he’s done.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=584989777 Brian P. Kasso Gaidry

    The one thing Romney got right in this video was when he
    said had his grandparents been Mexican, he would have a better shot at winning this election. That’s true. Mexican grandparents would have taught him to have more respect for his elders and poor people.

    • geraldfnord

      Maybe; one should not romanticise poor, brown, people’s attitudes and abilities…Mr Romney might have turned out as he  has had the maidenliest star in the firmament twinkled on his birth.

  • MrNutso

    Dig a little deeper and find that the owner of the house were the fund raiser was held is CEO of Sun Capital.  Sun Capital has been accused of forcing Friendly’s into bankruptcy to avoid paying pensions to the chains employees.

  • Matt Wade

    SEX PARTY MANSION! when will the media discuss this important fact!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=584989777 Brian P. Kasso Gaidry

    Mexican proverbs Mitt Romney would have learned if he actually had Mexican grandparents:

    * Don’t eat in front of hungry people.

    * He who is ignorant at home is ignorant abroad.

    * Malice leaves reality behind.

    * Let not the tongue speak what the head must pay for.

    * A word, like a stone, can’t be returned once thrown.

    And my personal favorite…

    * When someone has made up his mind to lose, it would be a pity should he win.

  • adks12020

    The funny part of this is the states with the highest proportion of those 47% are Red states. They are states that actually will vote for Mitt, despite the fact that he wants to ruin them to the benefit of his rich buddies. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/where-are-the-47-of-americans-who-pay-no-income-taxes/262499/ 
    They’ll still vote for him though because they care more about social issues like gay marriage, abortion, etc. than about the fact that the republican platform is designed in a way that doesn’t benefit them at all fiscally.

    • John_in_Amherst

       The GOP amalgamation of the self-centered rich elite and social conservatives who choose the parts of the bible that supports their judgmental world view while ignoring admonitions to care for the sick, poor, the stranger in our midst and let God sit in judgement of people’s lives is a marriage of convenience.  The uncaring rich elite, who will always have the wealth to insulate themselves from the strictures of the social conservatives need their votes.  The social conservatives need the strings of power that wealth buys.  It makes one wonder if or when the actions of one group will finally push the other too far… Perhaps Mitt has helped?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1408098372 Mari McAvenia

    I’ve heard Romney’s comments. All I have to say is that if he perceives 47% of Americans as “victims” then HE & his ilk are cold-blooded, predatory, victimizers. Deliberate abusers of innocent others ALWAYS blame their victims after an aggressive assault upon them.

    • sickofthechit

       Beautifully said.

    • notafeminista

      Well.  Seems Mr. Romney isn’t the only one who perceives them as victims.

      Way to perpetuate the stereotype.

      • jefe68

        So you agree with Mitt Romney then.

        • notafeminista

          Are they victims or not?

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1408098372 Mari McAvenia

            Many Americans, formerly middle-class, now find ourselves on the losing end of the game no matter how well we “play” & obey the accepted rules.

            We have been effectively disenfranchised from the Republican status quo, who, apparently lie, cheat & steal their way to success at the expense of their law obeying, civic-minded peers.

            I suspect that the majority of us are still reeling from the body blows to our lives and most are a bit embarrassed by our sudden reversals of fortune. Wait until WE discover that we’re all in the same boat now. All of us EXCEPT the mega-rich, that is. They are different from us, by choice. No better than anyone else when stripped of their riches, however. That is their vulnerable point: Fear of losing.

            We have already lost THEIR game. Time to start our own. One that benefits all who play by the accepted rules. 

          • jefe68

            Not in my view.
            Mitt Romney has shown he has contempt for people who are worse off than him.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Paolo-Caruso/1778940602 Paolo Caruso

      Romney is a predator for sure, but one must admit that the majority of Americans live off the dole.  Not just the welfare recipients, but think how many people have government jobs: federal, state, country and city.  Think of all the people in the military, agencies, police, post office and TSA.  Most of these government workers produce NOTHING.  These are all transfer payments that keep the US consumption economy buzzing along, without doing much work.

      And where does all this money come from????????
      The government borrows it and the banking system creates it from nothing.

      • Shag_Wevera

        It is insulting to say that government workers are “on the dole”.  They actually work for their pay.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Paolo-Caruso/1778940602 Paolo Caruso

           My point is that if you include ALL the Americans collecting a government check, as well as the thousands of “private” companies that rely on government contracts,  the private sector seems rather small in comparison.

          Americans have been living large by operating a prosperous economy by circulation fiat money amongst themselves.   And then they take this contrived currency and buy cheap goods from 3rd world peasants who are working their butts off in factories.

          How does this happen ???   Having the largest military in the world has a lot to do with it.

    • HaircutterRomney

      He blamed John Lauber after he forcefully cut off his hair. Using Mitt’s words, “Just look at  him, he can’t look like that!”, referring to Lauber’s bleached blonde hair. He was 17 or 18 when that happened, and he hasn’t changed a bit, only that he wants to victimize 47% of the population if elected president.

  • JGC

    I’ll repeat my screed from last night:  Mitt Romney, YOU are the Great American Freeloader.  Your money summers in Switzerland and winters in the Cayman Islands.  You have produced no useful widget for American business; just deals that end in factory closures and offshoring of American jobs and multimillion dollar bonuses in your ledger. You have used the roads that we taxpayers built to transport your hapless dog and your five boys (who have grown up to be non-military-serving banksters just like you) on care-free vacations.  This is not a patriot who can lead our country. He leads only for the 1%.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1408098372 Mari McAvenia

      I disagree with the last sentence, only.The 1% owns and dictates their agenda to HIM. Like Reagan & Bush Jr. before him, Romney is just another feeble-minded puppet. He does not “lead” anybody. He’s just a well-groomed political dog on a tight Republican leash.

      • keltcrusader

        He is the epitome of Grover Norquist’s “hand with a pen”

  • MrNutso

    Shame on those who think they are entitled to food.

  • Yar

    So this hour really is about abuse and the Boy Scout.  Same subject with  different exploitation.  Didn’t Mitt Romney also serve on the BSA board?

  • jefe68

    This show’s premise seems wrong. This is not about taxes and who pays them or not. It’s about who the real Mitt Romney is.

    He’s showing the world that he lacks empathy is not interested in being president for 47% of the population.

    What Mitt Romney reflects with his vile comment is how divided we have become as a nation and in some ways it’s akin to the fervor that lead up to the Civil War. Scary thought.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      Not just the content, but the manner. The person in that video sounds like the real Mitt.

      In that bit of footage he speaks with assurance and self-conviction. In other, prepared, appearances, he seems unsure as to whether a doe is a deer, a female deer.

    • MrNutso

      I agree.  The tax issue just shows how way off base Romney really is.

  • jcarlson23

    Does the 47% include the bankers who got bailed out?? 

  • Thinkin5

    Mitt’s plan to bring people together: I have utter contempt and disdain for 47% of the American people, I don’t think that the Palestinians want peace, so, now let’s work together and do things my way.
    Back to your boardroom Mitt.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/YMV2HJ2TBKMCN2QRAVI3I2OOGM Jim Jim

    He must be really out of touch if he doesnt realize that everything that hes saying is being recorded.

  • geraldfnord

    He’s implying that a group of Americans feel entitled, are too stupid to see where their long-term self-interests would be  and care naught for the effect their draining wealth has on the rest of us.

    Projection is obviously one vice Mr Romney allows himself.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      For all the stuff about that segment of citizens, it’s amazing how dependent the GOP is on the votes of many of that demographic who are worried now about the top tax rates because those folks are sure it’ll be their biggest problem in two or three years.

      The GOP needs thos folks to vote against their own self-interests.

  • sickofthechit

    Last night on at least two of the FAUX “News” shows they tried to lessen the impact by bringing up then candidate Obama’s comment in PA about guns, bibles and religion.  Problem is the equivalency doesn’t work.  Obama’s comment was about 10-15 of the electorate in western PA, while Romney’s comment was aimed at 46.4% of the overall electorate in the country.  Huge difference.

    I look forward to seeing the full tape trickled out over the next 45 days….

    • Scott B

       The funny part of what Obama said was that the press interviewed some people in PA and they were literally saying that after hearing his statement they were going to pray and get more guns.

      • sickofthechit

        Then they misunderstood what he was talking about.
         From NewtonWhale

        OBAMA: So, it depends on where you are, but I think it’s fair to say
        that the places where we are going to have to do the most work are the
        places where people feel most cynical about government… But the truth
        is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make
        progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go
        into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small
        towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and
        nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton
        administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive
        administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna
        regenerate and they have not. So it’s not surprising then that they get
        bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t
        like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way
        to explain their frustrations.

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/… “

  • Scott B

    I’d like to invite Mitt to pay out the same percentage of income we “freeloaders” in that 46% (the actual number) have to pay out in sales taxes, payroll taxes, school taxes, property taxes, et al, in our lives. 

    • StilllHere

      Everybody pays those, the 46% slide on income taxes.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Math coherence is another service you don’t offer.

        • Scott B

           My math is just fine. As is my sense of history and fact and empathy as to why they’re not paying federal income tax.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            (Check the reply: It wasn’t to you; I’ve given you some “likes”.

            I was talking about someone who doesn’t understand that all the other taxes weigh disproportionately on people not rich enough to pay Fed Inc Tax. And this isn’t the segment of society which the ScottTrade and ETrade TV ads are aimed at, as they aren’t well-off to invest (and risk losing) chunks of money. They also don’t have lawyers and accountants play games with assets to make them less taxable, as they simply don’t have that level of assets.)

          • Scott B

             My bad.

      • Scott B

        On federal income tax, yes; but if they did have to pay then millions of Americans would be below the poverty level and eligible for SNAP (food stamps), LIHEAP, Medicaid, etc, which would likely cost the government more in the just from basic math, not to mention the cost of the social problems that result when people are put into poverty: crime, courts, health care, economic down turn because people can’t afford to buy goods, blight… 

  • JGC

    Romney is so pessimistic and resigned to the lot of the unfortunate fortunates. We are a long way from Reagan’s sunny  Morning in America. 

  • MJABC

    When Romney talks about 47% that don’t pay income taxes, he doesn’t address the many who put their money in foreign (Swiss) accounts to AVOID paying taxes!!

  • mochajava13

    Romney’s comments offend me.  I’ve been part of the 47% that didn’t pay federal taxes for the simple reason that I did not make enough.  I’m not lazy or a victim – I worked in private child protective services that contracted with Massachusetts while Romney was governor here, and his administration never cared to determine if we ever made a decent wage.  I had a second job to make ends meet.  Yet everyone at this job had to have a Bachelor’s degree or higher. My husband was getting his MD and his PhD at the time; I have since gotten a graduate degree as well.  The reason why my husband and I didn’t pay federal income taxes is because we simply took advantage of deductions in the tax code, just like Romney does, and ended up not paying federal income taxes.  

    And we were NEVER eligible for federal benefits.  My husband and I had three roommates when we were first married because we couldn’t afford our own apartment.  We put off having children, again, because we couldn’t afford it.  Lazy and wanting a government handout?!? I was helping abused children and working a second job.  Romney does not understand the tax code or how to qualify for government benefits.

  • RolloMartins

    Romney just lost. That’s really all anyone needs to know.

    • Jasoturner

      You overestimate the American voter, I am afraid.

    • Jasoturner

      You overestimate the American voter, I am afraid.

  • Michiganjf

    SO exactly who are these 47 (actually 46) percent of Americans who “don’t pay income tax?”

    Well, Romney himself, for one, and others like him who make no income other than dividend and interest income… add to that, trust fund babies and the like.

    Then, you’ve got military service personnel, the elderly, the unemployed, the disabled, and the dirt poor who work, but don’t earn enough at minimum wage (or less) to support themselves or their families.

    My aunt, for instance, works FULL TIME as a Walmart greeter at minimum wage… that’s about 15,000 per year income.
    She paid almost 4,000 in property taxes last year on a modest house in Austin, where the nieghborhood vallues just happen to be rising. Add to that sales taxes, utility taxes on 3 utilities, and vehicle registration… she calculated THIRTY-FIVE PERCENT OF HER EARNINGS WENT TO TAXES, WITHOUT PAYING ANY INCOME TAX!!!!!!
    That’s far more than Romney’s paltry 13%!!!!!

    SOOOO, who’s REALLY taking a FREE RIDE, MR. ROMNEY????!!

    • notafeminista

      Her property taxes went to pay in large part for the public school district(s) in her city.  You know.  We all benefit from an educated and prosperous population.  Right?

      • Michiganjf

        Yup, and some of us OBVIOUSLY pay a much greater percentage of our income for things like education than ROYALTY LIKE MITT ROMNEY!!

        • notafeminista

          So, you are suggesting the public schools in Austin receive too much in taxpayer money?

          • Michiganjf

            What are you, a feminist?

            What does that have to do with anything you said, you might ask?

            EXACTLY!

  • Roy-in-Boise

    Thurston Howell III pretty much sums it up. Much like his other comment that like: “Oh, my wife has a couple of Cadillacs …” 

    • Ray in VT

      Well, I mean he doesn’t follow NASCAR that closely, so he’s not familiar with a lot of the drivers, but some of his friends are team owners.

  • Matt Wade

    People got no jobs, people got no money. So people ain’t paying taxes.

  • http://www.facebook.com/michael.zybura.5 Michael Zybura

    At a 13% tax rate, prior years not withstanding, Mitt nearly groups himself in the defacto Obamam “people”

  • MrNutso

    Even more striking is that when asked at list nights news conference if he really believed the things he said in the video, Romney walked off stage.

  • Thinkin5

    I can’t think of any wealthy person who has ever complained about what a poor, unfair, miserable lot they have. Is it really so tough to be a multi-millionaire these days?!!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=803620623 Jesus J J Chuo

    I wonder if Jesus would have said that “oh well father we got 53% of the people that is going to heaven, lets now worry about the 47% of them, they are going to hell anyway” thats a good Christian Romney!

  • Yar

    Look Tom, everyone who purchases healthcare or insurance pays taxes.  The 19 percent of GDP that is health relate is a redistribution of wealth, and is the most regressive form of taxation in the US.  Healthcare is so regressive that most won’t even acknowledge it as a tax.  The rich point to the tax they pay and whine while the working poor are the source that wealth.  Many pay more than 50 percent of their income in tax when healthcare is included.  No one in the top 1 percent pays that high of a rate.

  • Matt Wade

    Romney has lost David Brooks, which is pretty much a political death sentence.

    “Personally, I think he’s a kind, decent man who says stupid things because he is pretending to be something he is not — some sort of cartoonish government-hater. But it scarcely matters. He’s running a depressingly inept presidential campaign. Mr. Romney, your entitlement reform ideas are essential, but when will the incompetence stop? ”http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/opinion/brooks-thurston-howell-romney.html?_r=1&ref=opinion 

    • Saighead

       Though I’m unclear where the evidence is that “he’s a kind, decent man,” given the evidence that he’s been an entitled thug and craven self-aggrandizer.  If entitlement reform is essential, we can do well to start with his ilk, and the coddled oil- and defense-industries.  His pronouncements aren’t about incompetence; they’re the excretions of privileged obliviousness.

  • rvl1

    Mitt Said: MY JOB IS NOT TO CARE ABOUT THOSE PEOPLE.  Who? Seniors, lower income people, military service people.

    His world view is haves and have-nots.  If your in his camp you get tax breaks and subsidies. The others go it alone.

    • notafeminista

      In what world does Candidate Romney qualify for the EITC?  More Americans qualify for that than the tax-breaks Mr. Romney does.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Someone needs to introduce you to the fine print of the tax code. All that manuvering of money and assets comes with an entry fee, and that’s having enough money to make it worth someone’s while to hire tax attorneys and accountants.

  • Jacob Kraft

    Just want to point out that because of the way a progressive tax system works, NO ONE pays taxes on the first chunk of income represented by the standard deduction…not Romney, not Obama, not Bill Gates — NO ONE.  So why would the rich complain when they aren’t paying taxes on that portion of their income either?  They get to deduct that!

    • Brandstad

      When 47% pay 0% that 47% have a motivation to say lets not change the deductions but double the rate since they will still pay 0% and everyone else will pay double!

      This isn’t hard to understand with a HS education!

  • JGC

    The waiters seen in the video serving the attendees at the Marc Leder Romney fundraiser probably paid 15% federal earned income tax.  Romney’s effective federal tax rate was 13.9%.

    • notafeminista

      “Probably”?  Irresponsible and emotionally manipulative.

      • Ray in VT

        Like painting 47% of the American population as a bunch of deadbeats.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        So? I don’t hear you bitching about Reagan’s image of young bucks going from the welfare office to the supermarket to buy t-bone steaks.

    • Brandstad

      Why are you comparing two different taxes for two different people?

      Your analogy is no more revealing than saying Warren Buffet paid 30K in FICA taxes while I paid 12K in total taxes.

      • JGC

        OK, then I will say the waiters probably paid 15% federal earned income tax, and Romney paid 0% federal earned income tax.  Is that better?

  • http://www.facebook.com/amelia.struthers Amelia Struthers

    I am outraged by his comments. I would love not to be one of the 47%! I am a single mom, I am an underemployed teacher who has 25 years experience. I cannot get a teaching job, because schools hire the new grads who don’t cost as much. Gov. Romney could not do the job I do as an afterschool teacher – supplying low-income students with needed enrichment programming.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Yeah, right.  People don’t take hidden cameras and microphones just because.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

       Ever hear of smart phones?

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

         Unfortunately, yes.  I do have to wonder why campaign managers don’t bring jamming devices into these private meetings.

  • Potter

    Can we talk about Mitt Romney’s tax returns?

    • AlexisJanos

      Let’s talk.  While we’re at it…let’s talk about President Obama’s returns.  He sure does like spending Other People’s money.  Let’s talk about VP Biden’s returns.  I make a small fraction of his income and donate three times as much to charity.  Hypocrites!

      • keltcrusader

        deflect much?

  • Thinkin5

    Mitt has said basically the same thing in public several times. So have the candidates who ran on the right. This isn’t a gotcha, it’s just what the GOP stands for. Hypocrisy. Class warfare anyone?

  • J__o__h__n

    Was the footage from a security camera that was turned on to make sure the Republicans didn’t steal the silver?

  • http://profiles.google.com/standuncan Stan Duncan

    One thing I’m unclear on. Mr. Romney says 47% of the American public will not vote for him no matter what because they pay no taxes and want government handouts (like health care and education), and the polls say that that is about the percentage of Democrats in America who will also not vote for him no matter what. Is he equating the two? Is he saying that ALL people who oppose him are people who pay no taxes? ALL Democrats pay no taxes? This is not a partisan question, it’s a logic question. His logic seems crazy. 

  • NewtonWhale

    No, Tom, Obama’s comment was the complete opposite of Romney’s. He was telling his supporters they had to do MORE to reach out to those who did not support him:

    OBAMA: So, it depends on where you are, but I think it’s fair to say that the places where we are going to have to do the most work are the places where people feel most cynical about government… But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/obama-no-surprise-that-ha_b_96188.html 

  • Scott B

    Money’s
    money.  It spends the same.  If anything, unearned money should be
    taxed less, since people actually did something to earn it, and didn’t
    sit on their laurels and moved money from one money making scheme to
    another money making scheme, none of which produces anything but more
    money. Not a product, not jobs, just money. And for this they get to
    keep more of it? How’s that fair to those 99% that work way too hard for
    way too little, breaking their backs supporting the tax breaks for the
    1% that lobby the plutocrats to give them bigger tax breaks and more
    financial deregulation.

     Next there will be lobbying for people to buy anything tax-free if it was paid for with unearned income.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      Then we get into the idea (Calvinistic? I’m not sure) that if one is rich, one is simply a better class of person. Poor folk are certainly not favored by Capital-G God, else they wouldn’t be poor.

      Yip Harburg penned a song about the idle poor and idle rich; it’s never gone out of style.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    After all the context-free fascination our mainstream media has expressed for CEOs as elected officeholders (especially in the higher echelons, Senate and Presidential candidates), I consider this kind of happening a matter of “when”, not “if”.

  • JGC

    Sex-party romping hedge fund managers AND Value Voters! Who said the Republican Party doesn’t have a big tent?

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    Romney you sure love bashing yourself.

    Paying 13% or less (we know it’s less or you would show your taxes) when you’re a billionaire counts as “moocher” club too.

  • Joseph_Wisconsin

    So the cat is out of the bag, eh?  I am just surprised that anyone is surprised.  Everything about Mitt Romney from his days at a private school, through his tenure at Bain Capital, and now his campaign reveal that he is a born-with-a-silver-spoon-in-his-mouth person who has never really faced the reality of not just 47% of Americans, but closer to 90%.  Romney is typical of the type or wealthy person who just would like to secede from America as described in this article:  http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/revolt-of-the-rich/

    The 47% he is talking about include seniors now living (or about to be) on SS and Medicare who worked all their lives paying payroll taxes, as well as many other federal, state, and local taxes.   It includes military veterans receiving Veteran’s Administration benefits.  It includes disabled receiving SDI income.  It includes those working at places like Wal-Mart competing in the global economy and so working full time do not make sufficient income to pay taxes.  It includes college students getting federally guaranteed student loans.

    One can count me in for one who received the latter “handout” when I attended university.  Romney says I should have just borrowed the money from by parents (As opposed to having them just pay for it as did Romney’s parents?).  Now why didn’t I think of that at the time?  Oh yeah, my parents both worked just to support myself and three siblings through high school graduation and to be able to retire on their “handout” of SS and Medicare.  I have paid income taxes ever since graduation from college, but think that is part of living in a decent compassionate society for all.  Romney and the Republicans have become a party that I cannot even stomach. 

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/QMDZ3LH5U2B4GAT7J2HS4TCP6E Jim

    Free-loaders? not paying taxes… Mr Romney, please look at yourself first on the mirror before making these remarks.

    You do NOT fit to be the President of the free world.

    • JGC

      He could be fit to be President of the Free-loader World…

  • AlexisJanos

    Context, please.  When Governor Romey said, “My job is not to worry about those people,” he was talking about who he–as a candidate–can look to for votes.  Certainly a “President Romney” will be concerned about all American people.  He’s repeatedly shown his concern for all walks of life throughout his personal (look at how much he’s donated to charity) and public life.  He just doesn’t expect that he’ll be able to cut through the biased media and have a real opportunity to get his message across to the 47% to get their vote.

    • sickofthechit

      “Look at how much he donated to charity”? By Mormon dictates he is supposed to tithe 10%. He only tithed 7% on the meager number of tax returns he has released.  Not sure if the 7% was on his net or gross…..

    • keltcrusader

      Look how much he has donated to charity? Do you mean donated to the Mormon church – that helps other mormons? Kinda like keeping it in the family, don’t you think.
      He doesn’t worry about “those people” because he isn’t, has never been, and will probably never be one of “those people” who are comprised of elderly, disabled, military, and the working middle class & poor.

      • AlexisJanos

        President Obama is in the same class as Governor Romney.  I don’t yet understand why it’s considered OK for one but not the other.

  • DanNielsen14

    Social
    welfare entitlements are not a black and white benefit or drain on society. Social
    welfare entitlements negatively impact America when these laws create an incentive for
    unwarranted but wanted handouts which can reduce one’s ability to contribute to
    society at their capacity. America’s decline is extremely complex and difficult
    to assess although I would suggest the major factors are: increasing
    international competition, concentration of wealth, inadequate opportunity for
    Americans to contribute at their capacity, social welfare benefits creating wasteful
    incentives, an increasing focus on money manipulation versus value added work,
    and the increasing average medical cost per American lifetime. We need to
    stimulate private industry, allow for fair competition and rewards, and reign in individual wealth.
    http://www.slideshare.net/DanNielsen14/equitable-income-tax-presentation

  • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

    Pro-business? We are at a historic low in tax rates relative to the GDP while we are recovering from a historic high economic meltdown as poverty is increasing, the middle class is shrinking and the wealthy and their corporations are making record profits.

    Romney’s bubble is so distorted that he can’t possibly govern because he’ll make decisions based upon ignorance and delusional ideology. Look how well that worked out with Dubya.

    • TinaWrites

      Thank you for giving us this info so clearly!!

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    Retired Tim

    Romney’s going to slash your SS and Medicare. Please vote for him.

    And you obviously don’t know what vulture capitalism is if you think Romney is going to be good for business in this country.

  • DrewInGeorgia

    Wrong place Disqus.

  • MrNutso

    The federal income tax was always designed for the wealthiest to provide revenue for the federal government to carry out it’s functions.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Disturbing.  Romney states the obvious and gets hammered by the media.  Obama talks about bitter clingers of their guns and religion and we hear crickets from the media.

    I’m don’t recall onpoint changing their broadcast schedule and dedicating an hour to Obama in 2008 on his truly disturbing statements.
     

    • sickofthechit

      Take a breather, Turn off Rush, Turn off FAUX “News” for a couple of days.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Hypocrisy needs to be exposed.

    • timwesley

      While, given your first paragraph, I assume we’d disagree about most things, I was also surprised that they dedicated an entire show to this.

      The conversation does kind of get at the heart of Mitt’s whole pitch to his base, though. It’s not like he’s just piling on a comment like “you didn’t build that” or “I don’t care about poor people” for an hour.

      Discussing what someone said when they thought everyone wasn’t listening in the media, versus creatively taking something out of context in a speech, are different things.

  • Mouse_2012

    In short the guy from Club from growth agrees with Mitt Romney Comment.

  • J__o__h__n

    We have more people on unemployment and food stamps since George Bush and economic policies favored by Romney and Ryan destroyed the economy.   

  • sickofthechit

    This guy spews dung at an amazing rate. 
    Now he is spewing lies about work requirements
    We have more people on food stamps because we have suffered the largest downturn in the economy since the great depression.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    Moore, the WSJ guy, can’t help but compare gov’t assitance now v. the mid-1990s? Someone wanna introduce him to the concept of “business cycle”?

    He’s just here to spew talking points, very fast.

    Tom, where do you find these winners? Time to start interrupting him.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    Wall Street Journal Guy better be careful of what you wish for.

    When people don’t have food (stopping food stamps) they are going to be eating the rich.

  • Potter

    During the course of a lifetime, how many of those 47% have paid taxes and how many of the OTHERS that do now pay taxes will not be able at some point in their lives to pay income taxes???

    This guy talking now…..Stephen Moore. Obama expansion of food stamps is because of the crash in the economy that started in Bush’s Admin.

  • Jeff Weideman

    Excuse me? You’re as bad as Mitt Romney accusing those having to use food stamps as being loafers when it was the previous REPUBLICAN administration who caused those people to go on food stamps. Pull your head out of your… 

    • Jeff Weideman

       Obama didn’t cause those to go on welfare BUSH did. Freaken liar.

  • IsaacWalton

    This phone caller is misguided. Romney is about business but business overseas. I do not want a president who made his success shipping jobs elsewhere. This recent comment and his entire life is proof that he sees human beings as numbers on a balance sheet and can conveniently ignore them to his advantage. His excuse that he was only pandering to the audience of this 50k/plate dinner just shows he will say anything to please his donors. If he is in office he will not ignore them, but will continue to ignore the facts and people who make up a very needy part of the American people. 

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    Wall Street Journal Guy WHERE’S THE JOBS????!!!

    You privileged jerk.

  • Mouse_2012

    Yep that 47% of americans are all democrats….

    Geez WFTC come on.

  • MrNutso

    What BS.  They are not being paid not to work.  They are getting relief so they can pay there existing bills, eat and provide for their families.

  • ThirdWayForward

    Romney is an inveterate liar — what he says in private is completely opposite to the image he tries to project publicly. 

    He is running as a stealth candidate — refuses to clarify what he would do if elected, evades disclosure of his tax returns, and uses his religion to shield scrutiny of his hidden agendas.

    Whenever the veil has been thrown aside, Romney has been shown to be lying and then stonewalling. The public flip-flopping and distortion of truth is just the tip of the iceberg of this man’s rotten character. A prime example was his claim to be a Mass. resident when he ran for governor here — he refused to release his tax returns, which belied his claimed MA residency status. It was only years later that Romney and his minion admitted that his tax returns did not claim him as a MA resident, and then Romney tried to squirm out of it years later by retroactively changing his return.

    Plutocrat or not, Romney is a slime-bucket, not to be trusted AT ALL. It will be a tragedy for America if this man, who has never had to work in his life and feels entitled to pay no income tax, comes into power. 

    It says a great deal about contemporary conservatives that many of them agree with the perspectives that Romney espoused in the video.

    America has a BIG problem in its political culture, when a significant fraction of the electorate on the right believes the self-serving Randian mythology. They have no scruples, no commitment to either truth or justice, and they will use any tactic they can to weasel their way into power. Evil, evil, evil.

    • Bruce94

      Great perspective on the Machiavellian character of the current GOP choice before us. 

      Seems to me that we haven’t seen such a darkly Reactionary option from the GOP since they offered the electorate that paragon of national chauvinism, religious orthodoxy and phobic racism in 1964 – none other than Mr. Ultra-Conservative, Barry Goldwater. 

      Some people and political parties, when confronted with social and economic change of the scale that we have endured in the last decade or so, revert to a longed-for (often imaginary) older order and indulge a mythology (as you aptly describe) that appeals to our worst instincts including fear and prejudice, which this extremist iteration of the GOP seems only too eager to exploit. 

      As Mitt and his minions’ level of desperation rises, I expect that we can look forward to more extremism from the Far Right like the stereotyping and scapegoating on display at this most recent fundraising feast of high roller wing-nuts caught on video.

  • NewtonWhale

    Doesn’t this make it all the more necessary for Romney to release his tax returns and prove that HE isn’t in the 47%?

    Unlike the 30 Major Corporations who are:

     Thirty corporations paid less than nothing in aggregate federal income taxes over the entire 2008-10 period. These companies, whose pretax U.S. profits totaled $160 billion over the three years, included: Pepco Holdings (–57.6% tax rate), General Electric (–45.3%), DuPont (–3.4%), Verizon (–2.9%), Boeing (–1.8%), Wells Fargo (–1.4%) and Honeywell (–0.7%). 

    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/11/03/360185/30-corporations-no-taxes/ 

  • J__o__h__n

    Why is the Republican apologist complaining about fairness?  They usually yell class warfare when tax fairness is raised as an issue.

    • Mouse_2012

      He’s trying to paint that Turd gold

  • http://www.facebook.com/francis.devine Francis DeVine

    If as Gov. Romney says, his comments were off the cuff, than it terrifies me to think of what he might say in an international crisis.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

     A work requirement for food stamps wouldn’t do any good in places where there aren’t sufficient jobs.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      Actually, wouldn’t it depress that segment of the labor market?

      I’d like someone to chime in on that; it’s not my gig, but if I were to be job-hunting at that kind of level, and got a job, the last thing I’d want would be having to compete with people working for food stamps.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    LOL.

    The Democrat congresswoman can only offer stale cliches.
     

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    Wall Street Journal Guy the one thing that makes me happy now that I’m unemployed with no unemployment is that I’m NOT paying for the military or the bail out your criminal buddies on Wall Street.

  • AaronGregory

    Executive compensation is rising and that for the lower classes has been flat or dropping.  The wealthy are creating the very “moocher” class they loathe so much.  

  • jim_thompson

    This tape just shows that Romney,and it appears most of the current GOP, has no clue regarding the country they live in.  None other than David Brooks-a conservative who has been trying to like Romney-makes that point today.

    His comments are just not true.  If he wants to talk about that so called 47%, let’s talk about who has been putting their lives on the line, literally,  where do the numbers fall there.  Not to be too personal, but six men in his family-himself and five sons-and not one second of military service.   HMMMM.

  • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

    Stephen, so let them eat cake? You are clueless…. there are so many people out there who want to work but can’t find it… and shame on you for comparing this recovery to the 90′s. Back in the 90′s 4 of 5 jobs created by corporations were not overseas like they are today!

    And learn some arithmetic: we’re at record low tax rates relative to the GDP!!!

  • Eric Herot

    Dear Tom, please ask this question: “WHAT EXPANSION OF FOOD STAMPS???”  There has been NO policy of expanding EITHER of these programs.  100 percent of the “increase” was a result of the recession!  Not, 99.8 percent, not 80 percent, one-hundred percent!!!

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       The facts are not on your side.  There has been an expansion –independent of the recession.  btw – the recession ended in 2009.

      Here is an article that describe the expansion under both Bush and Obama.

      http://washingtonexaminer.com/the-great-bush-obama-food-stamp-expansion/article/2500895#.UFiH2lGvN8E

      • Eric Herot

         The article you’ve linked to is highly misleading.  All of the permanent eligibility and incentive changes were part of the 2008 farm bill which was signed into law by the Bush administration.  The rest of the changes were *temporary* measures enacted as part of the 2009 ARRA (“The stimulus act”) and taper off over a short time.

        At any rate, I don’t think you can argue that food stamps are a problem simply because their use has been expanded.  SNAP is a program founded on the idea that no one in the richest country in the world should ever have to go hungry.  If no one goes hungry, the program is a success by its own measure.  If people are going hungry, then the program needs to be expanded.  End of story.

        The fundamental issue here is whether one believes that guaranteeing that someone can always put food on the table somehow acts as a disincentive to work.  When the economy is in recession and the number of unemployed people vastly exceeds the number of available jobs, worrying about this obviously makes no sense.  Failing to expand the SNAP program to meet demand is simply going to mean that people start going hungry OR in the case of people who have a middle-class net worth but no job, they’ll flood the market with their stuff while they try to sell it in order to buy food.  Not only would this further depress the housing market, but if the recession did not end before they’d sold off all of their stuff, they’d probably end up qualifying for the lower requirements in the end AND they’d be much worse off once the recession was over (there is no good economic argument for people spending their retirement savings in order to eat).

        Lastly is the issue of people who turn down jobs that don’t pay as well as the food stamp benefits.  Conservatives have a psychological aversion to this because it means someone is getting a government handout (my tax dollars!) when they could be working.  Firstly I don’t think this is ever as common as pundits say it is.  Most people don’t like to have big empty spots on their resume, nor do they like the idea of not working (it’s boring and makes you feel like a mooch!)  But economically it is a reasonable thing to do.  It incentivizes employers to pay people well enough that they don’t go hungry or continue to collect other government benefits.  Of course this is also why big business leaders tend to hate these programs.  They could make so much more profit if only they could pay their workers minimum wage (or less)!  But it really isn’t good for the country for people to be making poverty wages.

        The thing is, jobs are created by demand, they are not created simply because there are people out there willing to do the work at any price.  If the economy were in recovery and people were buying things, businesses would pay what they needed in order to get people to come work for them.  If jobs are going unfilled right now it’s because they’re offering poverty-level wages or looking for a skill set that is in short supply, NOT that there are just millions of people out there who would rather collect a meager government handout than get a job.  That’s just ridiculous.

  • Saighead

     Why does Stephen Moore have any credibility at all?  He’s a Wall St hack who’s expressed his own disdain for democracy and his wholesale commitment to plutocracy.  He’s the first person I’d expect to hear sing a full-throated defense of Romney.

  • TinaWrites

    The BUSINESSMEN TAKE THE JOBS OVERSEAS, then with a TWISTED LOGIC they blame:  citizens for not paying taxes (how CAN they:  they can’t find jobs!); and they blame President Obama for more people being on Unemployment and Welfare (how ELSE can they live?)!!

    THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS!!!  Unless it’s THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY!!! 

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

       Wall Street Journal Guy is a tool of the criminal elite that are destroying this country.

      He flaps his mouth for his rich employers (Rupert Murdoch is his owner)

      Pay no mind to him as their time is coming to an end.

      • TinaWrites

        Thanks!

  • Scott B

    Obama’s “President Food Stamps”?  The speaker has that Republican trait of denying fact, history, and experience in that GW Bush expanded the Food Stamp program to include more people. That was actually good for the the millions that lost jobs and needed the help after the crash of ’08 that Bush was no small part of, with his 2 unfunded wars and tax breaks for the rich, financial deregulation, and the giving away of the surplus.

  • Satwa

    As a percentage of workforce, people may not be working, but millions of them went back to school to get re-trained. This guy talking is out of touch. Also, a lot if people have 3 jobs which doesn’t show up the same way.

  • OnPointComments

    Unscripted moments say a lot about a person, dont they?
     

    Barack Obama revealed his disdain for middle America’s faith and values at a closed-door San Francisco fundraiser:  “You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest… it’s not surprising they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” 
     

    President Obama to Russian President Medvedev:  “This is my last election … After my election I have more flexibility.”
     

    I’m looking for the On Point archive discussing these quotes, but I haven’t found it.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=644943450 Eric Miller

      As a member of the very working-class, midwestern subculture Obama spoke of in that quote, hate to say it but he’s absolutely right! I’m glad he called us out on this and, if you’re honest, you know it too and you know it needs to change!

  • DrewInGeorgia

    You tell em’ Miss Kaptur! Thank you!

  • http://www.facebook.com/suzane.watkinson Suzane Watkinson

    Where are the jobs???  There have been a few years in the recent past when I paid no income tax, but its not because I liked having no income!

  • Bruce94

    As the “Gipper” once observed, “there he goes again” — Mitt the poster boy for entrenched power and wealth indicting 47% of the population as dependent moochers as if reciting lines from an Ayn Rand novel.
     
    Ironically, this latest gaffe from a tin-eared, silver-spooned child of privilege who risked nothing with his former bosses’ job guarantee and his family’s fortune to fall back on in the event his gig as a leveraged buy-out artist at Bain didn’t work out.

    Catalog this remark along with enumerable other insights into this political chameleon’s vacuous mindset like the following gems with the inference in brackets:

    –”Let Detroit’s auto industry go bankrupt” [and let’s have an outsourcing orgy]

    –”Corporations are people, my friend” [especially people who befriend me with 75% of their anonymous donations going to my campaign]

    –”We talk about income inequality and tax policy only in quiet rooms” [with good reason…if the people understood my intention to redistribute income from the bottom to the top, they would reject my candidacy]

    –”I don’t care about or focus on the very poor” [or the working middle-class either]

  • Mouse_2012

    ??

    They do. BrietBart got on the map for posting just that.

  • DanNielsen14

    Social
    welfare entitlements are not a black and white benefit or drain on society. Social
    welfare entitlements negatively impact America when they create an incentive for
    unwarranted but wanted handouts which can reduce one’s ability to contribute to
    society at their capacity. America’s decline is extremely complex and difficult
    to assess although I would suggest the major factors are: increasing
    international competition, concentration of wealth, inadequate opportunity for
    Americans to contribute at their capacity, social welfare benefits creating wasteful
    incentives, an increasing focus on money manipulation versus value added work, non-taxed
    individual and corporate income, and the increasing average medical cost per
    American lifetime. We need to stimulate private industry and reign in
    individual wealth.

    http://www.slideshare.net/DanNielsen14/equitable-income-tax-presentation 

  • Craig Pierpont

    We are looking at the symptom and not the disease. 
    We do not have 47% unemployment.
    Government aid is a government subsidy for businesses who do not pay their employees a living wage.
    Employed people who pay no income taxes are not being paid enough to generate an income tax liability.
    Unemployment compensation is a government subsidy for employers who benefit from having a pool of potential employees willing to work for less than a living wage.
    Retired senior citizens on government aid are dependent on that aid because their employers did not provide a legitimate pension.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       Straight to the point. Thanks.

  • http://www.facebook.com/axewieldingmaniac Rickey T Bishop

    Most of that 47% loan the gov money all year long out of each pay check interest free  and if they are lucky that get most of it back at the end of the year

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       If they could afford Romney’s tax people, they wouldn’t have it withheld.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OGMNNTBQJCU6MBPAWQJ55ZYEXE Island

    Just a comment in regards to wanting to be on welfare. There’s a big difference between getting a $600 check a month to working and making two, three or four thousand dollars a month. So given the choice between sitting on my behind and collecting $600 or working and collecting $3000 I’d go for the latter. Given the choice between being on the street or collecting $600 I’ll choose the latter also. Most people don’t want to just get along and barely survive, it’s just that that’s the only option sometimes.

  • litekeep

    You need to discuss this info with this map.
    47% is specifically described here:

    http://taxfoundation.org/article/states-vary-widely-number-tax-filers-no-income-tax-liability 

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Marcy Kaptur misquotes Romney.

    Memo do Marcy.  Detroit did go bankrupt.
     

    • StilllHere

      But bondholders got screwed.  Taxpayers have lost money.  But unions got a good return on their $400 million investment in Obama.

  • Mouse_2012

    So I missed it,

    Do the guy from Club for Growth want to raise taxes on the 47% of america? I thought they were advocating tax cuts for all americans? If such is so than isn’t it interesting that the guy from the Club for growth is attacking people for not paying taxes with telling americans they want to advocate even lower taxes in which would increase the # of americans not paying taxes?

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

       I think that was Wall Street Journal Guy.

      And yes, he’s wants everyone, no matter how poor they are from the criminal elites policies of outsourcing, suppressing wages, extracting rents, to pay for the military because wars are important.

  • http://twitter.com/sampleloft rap

    So Romney can evade paying taxes, put $ in Swiss Bank Accounts, have dillusional Caymen Island addresses, ship jobs over seas so we the people lose our jobs or work for less pay and we the people are still paying top dollar in taxes regardless of our incomes.
    We the people pay for wars, whether we agree with them or not, we the people support out troops… even when we can’t afford to put food on the table…so where are those tax returns Romney…if you’re going to work for the people then your resume needs to present that part of you too!

  • http://www.facebook.com/ian.macdonald.9638 Ian MacDonald

    Because of the deregulation of the banking industry I lost work and have not been able to find work comparable to my old work. I work several low-paying part time jobs and apply almost daily for work but get nowhere. I worked and work as many long hours as Mr Romney has. I dare Mr. Romney, whose policies are of no help, to come directly to me and call me a free-loader. And he’s no self made man. If he weren’t connected through family he’d be another 150k per year businessman who could be out on his butt like many of us.

  • Citizen_Zed

    If entitlement is the issue, the Red States should be trembling since most suck more money from the government than they contribute. Most Tea Party people too are older and on government assistance of some kind. Watch Fox and you’ll see the commercials aiming to get calls for a free scooter.

    Romney wants to tag Obama’s cuts to corporate welfare as cuts to Medicare.  Romney’s convention speech was all about “what we deserve.”  

    The real wealth production in this country transpires in blue states and blue cities, while we have to listen to entitled, tit sucking Republicans complain about a culture of entitlement…. and everyone else as practicing class warfare.

  • Roy-in-Boise

     

    “I love that we can count on Mitt to screw up his whole campaign by just being Mitt.”

  • Ellen Dibble

    The 47 percent may include a lot of non-voters.  I tend to think if you expect the Democrats will increase your taxes and the Republicans will not, then you will vote.  You are one of the voting type of Americans, the type who pays plenty of taxes already.  Those who are working a few shifts and have no time to get to the polls, or read the fine print in the OpEds, or money to pay a poll tax, you are part of the 47 percent, and no, you probably won’t vote.  Obama should consider that. 

  • bacterial_sizzle

    Romney makes it sound like all hell would break loose if food and housing were considered human rights instead of privileges. The human population has doubled since 1980. The reality is, we simply don’t need everyone working 40 hours a week.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       Give me Single Payer Health care and I’ll retire :)

  • http://twitter.com/sampleloft rap

    We the people need to do a credit check, a criminal back ground check and give Romney a lie detector test.
     

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/J2UPQK7SH4UFMF7AFKS3JX362U C.A.

    As someone who has been unemployed for many months because of a merger, I fully expect to be disparaged by Romney – he and his party consider people like me a nuisance. 

    I used to be a centrist, but sadly, the GOP has deteriorated into a party of zero compassion and reason.  Had they a scrap
    of either, businesses would get off their cash hoards and foresee the logic in ‘economic heroism’, by WANTING to improve the economy and create jobs.  Instead, they toss us out as sound-bites to the hungry media in order to garner votes. 

    The video affirms what those of us subjected to his governing already knew.  The less fortunate are NOT ‘victims’…they don’t want a check…they want a chance!

  • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

    This reflects the core of Republican ideology and motivations. The audience are the backers, the share holders of Republican politicians, eating it up like chocolate chip cookies.

    Think on that in the voting booth.

  • Samuel Howe

    I believe that as that as a nation, we have the responsibility to take care of all our citizens. I disagree completely with conservative policies that support individualism and the reduction taxes at the expense of welfare programs. I believe that taxes should be higher for many Americans, especially the wealthy, in order to provide for those who need help.

    However, I believe that Romney’s comments here are being misrepresented. Although Romney may not care about low-income Americans, that is not what he is saying here; Romney’s point is that most those who do not pay income tax are not going to vote for him, no matter what he does, and therefore his campaign should focus on those swing voters who have not yet made up their minds instead.

    • ThirdWayForward

      Yes, it’s true that in this context he is talking about how to win the election (someone has recently pointed out that Romney is a “deal closer” — not concerned with the long run ramifications, but interested in doing anything it takes to achieve a short-term goal, in this case getting elected).

      But, there is a much deeper and pervasive attitude among conservatives that they really don’t care about the bottom half of the population. Romney shares this attitude — there is no evidence that Romney, were he to become president, would consider the interests of the bottom half (as he would think, they didn’t elect him). It’s not even clear radical conservatives give a damn about the bottom 90% — look at how they skew everything to favor the upper classes.

      The problem is that the Randians are completely naive about economic matters. Capitalism needs a healthy middle class to buy the goods and services it produces. Too much concentration of wealth(and we are at historic highs in terms of what fraction of our wealth is held by the uber-rich) results in economic stagnation.

      Capitalism needs social democrats and social support programs to function well (which are also good things in and of themselves in terms of the quality of life for most of us — freedom from the terror of being old and absolutely impoverished and without any healthcare).

      • BHA_in_Vermont

         The amazing thing is that a lot of the “right” are conservative religious types. Those who traditionally would be tagged as “caring for those with less”.

        How do they square:
        - “I’ll vote for anyone who is against abortion”
        with
        - “I’m going to vote for someone who wants to cut support for millions upon millions in need of assistance who live a ‘barely hanging on’ life”?

  • hennorama

    2 words: buhbye Romney

  • Satwa

    As a Brit, it is stunning to me that a politician says its people are not entitled to health care or food.
    What about the severely autistic child in a poor family Mr. Romney? Not entitled to government help?
    What about the out of work 60 year old man, who lost his job after 40 years, and is living in the park Mr. Romney? Not entitled to government help, maybe free re-training for a job etc.?
    What about the out of work 60 year old man, who lost his job after 40
    years, and is living in the park Mr. Romney? Not entitled to government
    help?
    What about a family, lost their home, lost their job due to Wall Street arrogance, and are having trouble feeding their kids. Let them starve Mr. Romney?
    And please don’t come back with that tired old “charity” solution. Most people don’t want charity, they just want society to help them out of a bad situation, and charity can’t cover it all, after the rich have skewed the wealth up to the 1%

    • TomK_in_Boston

      It’s easy to understand our righty pols once you realize that their agenda is to redistribute even more wealth and income to the top, and that everything they say (that is, and want the public to hear) is designed to camouflage that agenda.

  • RKushwaha

    Mitt does it again!  Just proving, again, that he is not competent to run the country.  It takes more than business savvy to be an effective leader of a country facing major challenges!

    One cannot lead a country as one, by abandoning almost 50% of the country.

    Mitt’s incompetence is just a symptom of the GOP’s dysfunction: 
    - outright denial of other points of view
    - unwillingness to compromise
    - justifying their inflexibility with pseudo patriotism while pursuing narrow ideological (theologically inspired) agenda

    Mitt and GOP are not competent to lead the nation in a complex and interdependent world of the 21st century.

  • Jeff Weideman

    People on the left? You mean ALL US 47%?

    We’re on food stamps because of you freaks.

    AND WHOSE FAULT IS IT A HORRIBLE ECONOMY? DO YOU REMEMBER WHEN IT ALL FELL?

    Obviously you have no clue and PEOPLE DO NOT STOP LOOKING FOR WORK ON UNEMPLOYMENT. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO LOOK FOR WORK WHILE ON UNEMPLOYMENT.

    ASK THIS JERK WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME HE WAS ON UNEMPLOYMENT?

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    You elites destroy the middle class in this country and then tell us we are moochers.

    You’re unbelievalbe.

  • https://openid.aol.com/opaque/862139a4-e557-11e1-bc17-000bcdcb2996 Webb Nichols

    The question is – Will the conservatives in the US support a safety for the new normal 7-9 % unemployed going forward.

    One cannot live on unemployment and it does not last forever. There are more people wanting to work than there are jobs. That is a basic fact. 

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       Nope, time to bring back poor farms. Live in squalor, work yourself to death and remove your lazy “taker” self from the face of the earth.

  • Satwa

    The rich are not paying their fare share of taxes

  • http://twitter.com/skinnybonetree Bennie BER

    This comment only clarifies Governor Romney’ definition of middle income as $250,000/year. This is the new Lake Wobegon: 99% are below average.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    These programs are so generous?

    Live on them for a year and get back to us.

    Privileged Jerk.

  • Brandstad

    I don’t understand the contraversy.  Mitt stated a fact and while I wouldn’t call the 47% completely dependent, but at least 50% are taking advatage of the system and screaming that we need more taxes for the rich!

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       ”50% are taking advantage of the system”

      First, I assume by “taking advantage” you mean using/benefiting from, not cheating, the system.

      Wow, that is a target just waiting for an arrow.
      Romney “takes advantage” of every possible item in the tax codes that his wealth can buy to reduce his taxes. And he is calling for cuts to taxes on “job creators” like himself. Probably the only job he has “created” is that of the guy or gal who makes sure he is getting “full advantage” from the tax codes. The bulk of his net is making more “lowest possible tax rate” money as I type. If he made $20M on $200M in 2010 (don’t we all wish we could get 10% return!), he likely made $22M in 2011.

      So people not making enough to live on taking advantage of available government services are “bad” and “takers” but people making more money (doing ZERO WORK) in a year than I could spend in a life time using the tax code to minimize their taxes are “good”.

      OK, got it.

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    Romney clearly fails to see that the REASON there are so many people who pay no income taxes is because they don’t make enough money to live on. They aren’t all watching soap operas and eating bon-bons. Sure, there are probably a very small minority that do but mostly they are people working at minimum wage jobs, full time if they are lucky that don’t pay the rent and food let alone medical costs. He makes more money in a minute, through his blind trust, doing NOT A DAMN THING, than the “non income tax payers” make working all year.

    Perhaps if we are so unlucky that he becomes president, all the jobs will suddenly pay $20, $30 per hour and people would be able to pay income taxes and be happy to do so.

    This would be Mitt Romney, the man who cheated on his Mormon tithing in 2010. Not even a question of 10% before or after taxes. A man whose “charitable” contributions, which are DEDUCTED on his federal taxes, amounted to $1.5M to the Mormon church and $1.5M to a charity run by HIM. Which gave money to …. the Mormon church, his alma mater, the private schools his kids went to various other self serving non profits. There were some donations to “non affiliated” charities as well.

  • MrNutso

    They are not being paid not to work.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

    I wonder if he included all those corporations that don’t pay taxes or actually get net gains from government handouts in his 47%?

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

      2/3s of all corporations in American PAY NO TAXES.

      Government Accountability Office study

      • peterlake

         American corporations are taxed higher than in EVERY other country.
        For that reason corporations find ways to avoid all taxes, as G.E., led by Obama’s buddy Jeffrey Imhalt.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

           So, then stop saying corporaions are taxed the highest in the world.

          They are PAYING it. And that’s what counts.

          Gee, think you add Exxon and Bank of America to the list along with thousands and thousands of others or do you only have that old tired GE to throw out?

          • peterlake

             No, they’re not paying it.
            The company you cite, Bank of America, paid corporate taxes at a lower rate than Mitt: 14%.
            And PepCo paid at a NEGATIVE rate of -57%.

            Why? Because our tax laws are screwed and skewed.
            Who can fix them? Not Obama.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

            Oh right. Mr I don’t pay my fair share is going to make it all better.

          • peterlake

             I believe Mitt paid $7 million in taxes — everything he owed.
            Who decides what his “fair share” is?
            You?

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

            13% and less is not a fair share for a billionaire.

        • TomK_in_Boston

          Everyone who’s not just parroting talking points knows that the US effective tax rate is way below the nominal rate and we are on the low side of the developed world on corporate taxes.

          But who wants a worldwide race to the bottom on taxes anyway? All it does is leave us unable to function as a nation.

          • BHA_in_Vermont

             I think Congress has already taken care of that.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       No, they aren’t Obama supporters. ;)

  • sickofthechit

    57% getting a government benefit include retirees collecting Social Security.  Does this guy really want to antagonize the Grey Panthers?

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    Benefits up to 35,000 a year????!!!!!!!!

    Where???????? You are lying.

  • litekeep

    Who does this???  Not work until their benefits run out?  I’ve been laid off twice in my 25 years of work and I couldn’t WAIT to find a new job!!

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       Why, all those irresponsible, dependent, entitled, slacker Obama supporters of course!

  • Satwa

    Your guest is out to lunch. Most people want to work. You are out of touch.

  • NewtonWhale

    Jesus:

    Behold the lilies of the field, how they grow. They labor not, nor do they spin. 

    Mitt:

    Moochers!

  • AlanThinks

    The guy from the Club for the Dumb epitomizes the reason the Republican party is at it knees.

  • OnpointListener

    One way to fix “entitlement” issues:

    Raise the minimum wage, enact fair trade agreements instead of free trade agreements, enact a single payor health system.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       ”Raise the minimum wage”

      Can’t do that, it would put the small business owners out of business.

      OK, so I actually agree with the entirety of your post. :)

      • OnpointListener

        Too bad everyone is not as smart as us..  ;)

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Social services should be aimed at moving people to independence.  What about programs that promote business startups, for example?  What about training programs to give unemployed people new skills?  I’m not against food stamps, but we should be putting the bulk of our money into programs that move people up, rather than keep them at the same low level.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       What about a NATIONAL SINGLE PAYER HEALTH CARE SYSTEM so people CAN move to independence and start businesses, etc.

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

         That may be too much.  How about a public option available to everyone with fees based on income?  That leaves choice in the market, but would offer all of us the same benefit.

        • BHA_in_Vermont

           I’m holding out for SP. The SOLE motivation of “for profit” insurance companies is the same motivation that Romney had at Bain: PROFIT for the investor and big payouts for the execs. They accomplish this by limiting services.

          SP doesn’t mean no choice of doctors, it means a choice of ANY doctor. ALL doctors would belong to the “plan”. This is NOT true of the current system. In fact, when my oldest was born, my wife and I switched primary care doctors because ours weren’t in the same insurance “group” as the Pediatrician. In most families, the kid goes to the doctor a lot more than the parents. It was the “For Profit” insurance business model that forced us to change doctors.

          Give us a “base level” SP plan with supplemental from the “for profits” for those who can afford it. It will cost LESS than we are paying now and no one would be without health insurance.

  • dorothyt

    So people depending on govt. is a bad thing, but corporations depending on govt. dole is not so? Maybe we should withdraw subsidies for agricultural products, dairy and oil industry etc. Let the ‘free market’ pay full taxes and create all the jobs. I don’t understand economy but I do know that it is not as simple as people make it out to be.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jim.salman.3 Jim Salman

    1. About the 47% remark – I think this reveals a highly cynical mindset.  There are plenty of affluent and wealthy Obama voters. They are willing
    to pay taxes that help fund social programs because they think it’s
    necessary for a fair and just society that’s worth living in. But the Romney campaign must think all Obama voters vote solely out of selfish, what’s-in-it-for-me interest, not out of a concern for what’s best for the entire country. I have to wonder if GOP leaders naturally think this way because what often motivates them to vote is greed (i.e. lower taxes for well-to-do) and self-interest.  In other words, a true cynic doesn’t think ANYONE really believes in “we’re all in this together.” (as Bill Clinton said).

    2. As for the “makers and takers”. A result of stark black & white thinking, this is a superficial and dishonest slogan that feeds into an extremely dark and negative vision of the world. When it’s taken to its logical conclusion, civil service workers are regarded as parasites. But here’s the thing – this slogan wouldn’t have power and widespread appeal among struggling working class people without the implication that the “takers” are all “bad” people – illegal immigrants, foreigners, liberals; and that most of their hard-earned tax dollars are being wasted to enable those “others” to live lives of ease and leisure.

    3. Overall, what is most shocking about this story is how it suggests Romney and Ryan very possibly do regard a large set of Americans – those that are middle class and poor (and working) and who tend to vote Democratic – as no better than germs or vermin.

  • Ray in VT

    Everyone here should be informed, as I have been, that the South is poor because of generations of assistance from the North.  Just FYI.

    • jpolock

      So we should cut them off?

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Maybe we should make them show up for press opportunities so the Democratic president can give these Red state governors big cardboard novelty checks, every single month, without which they’d be in deep shite.

        It’s at least be on TV opposite their pretending (like Rick Perry) that they’re better and doing something smarter and are all RealAmericans(TM) who don’t need Washington’s (disproportionately from Blue states) money.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Does Stephen Moore consider that when people are out of work and unhealthy, there is quite a bit of drag towards getting yourself declared disabled?  It seems to me you can get yourself disabled just by abusing drugs, and I suppose a doctor would declare you disabled rather than have you going hungry.  I mean, at the edge, the government can drive people to actual disability, which is not a very good springboard toward self-employment, which is probably the best option for people who are really struggling both with health and opportunity.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Memo to David Corn:  Romney DID say he wants the poor to get better jobs and his programs will do exactly that.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       What programs, exactly, would those be?  All he says is he’s going to create jobs. Big, empty claim with no details.

      • Steve__T

        He going to create jobs…IN CHINA

  • adks12020

    as someone that had to help a roomate with our mutual bills (not related to me or a girlfriend) because he lost his job I take a huge offense to the last commenter.  He COULD NOT afford to live on what he was given by the government. He tried to find work all the time and couldn’t.  He had to move back in with his parents at 28 because he couldn’t find another job, couldn’t afford to pay the bills, and didn’t want to be a burden on me, not because he wasn’t looking. 

  • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

    Stephen, you’re just wrong. I’ve been unemployed, thrice. I know and have known people who tried and tried to find work and could not. When 147 people apply for the same job, it means that there are sadly 146 losers.

    When were you last unemployed,  feared for your job and feared for your family? Its a landscape like you’ve never known.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       ”Its a landscape like you’ve never known.”

      And that is one BIG problem with Romney. He is at the country club denigrating the minimum wage people who clean the toilet he pees in.

  • mahnazmehr

    It however, is a fact that out of the 10 states who paid the lowest in Federal Income tax, 8 of them are Red states (Republican states) that voted for McCaine and not for Obama. How could Mr. Romeny and the Republican party ignore this?
    Also, it needs to be clarified for American Public that we are only talking Federal Tax. All these people do pay income tax, SS tax, sales tax, etc.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/EAYKORTHSLPQEZFKXBJMXMV2IE Tony

      Your analysis is too simple.  These so called Red states receive more welfare type benefits because of the sizable minorities in these states who are victims that vote 99.9% of the time for democrats.  Why don’t you look up that fact.

      • jpolock

        Well well well, aren’t we just the most overt (but probably non-self realized) rascist?

        But you are WRONG.  Most of the benefits go to the Republican votin, gun totin, god-lovin, tea-baggin….

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/EAYKORTHSLPQEZFKXBJMXMV2IE Tony

          Don’t allow facts to get in the way of your demo attacks.  If you don’t like the facts, change them…I forgot you like to have people dependent on the system because you derive your specious power from victims…do you feel good now?

          • jpolock

            No, the FACT is most benefits go to white folks, and I do beleive that they are still in the majority. 

            And it is quite a fact too, that most whites in Red states are conservatives.

            If this was untrue, the south would be Democrat no?

            And sure, they too are “victims” of conservative policies, and a failed trickle down economy where the Bains of the world have shipped their jobs to Aisa.  Doesn’t give any “power” only sadness…and greater burden on the Blue states (haha!)

            p.s. thanks for not even trying to defend your previous rascism, suggesting that it is the minorities (somehow making up 47%?!) that are the problem.  guess you at least have the honor to genuflect…

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/EAYKORTHSLPQEZFKXBJMXMV2IE Tony

            I suggest you look up the statistical difference between absolute and relative differences. 

            You, my friend, are quoting absolute stats because it fits your specious narrative.  Of course, there are more whites on welfare because their are more whites in this country – i.e., the denominator is larger. 

            However, if you correctly use relative stats, minorities as a ratio of their total receive more benefits.  It’s a fact – I’m sorry it doesn’t fit your narrative, but you’re not helping anyone by spewing incorrect data.

            Back to 10th grade statistics for you.

  • http://twitter.com/bostonjake Jake Dacey

    I am a successful software entrepreneur and investor in many startups.  What Romney doesn’t get is that the Republicans drove the economy off a cliff with excessive tax cutting and derugulation — when they should have invested in job creation with spending on education and infrastructure.  That’s why too many don’t pay income taxes – they don’t have jobs  

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Please explain how cutting taxes hurt the economy.  It may have increased the debt but its impact on the debt is much smaller than the unfunded entitlement liabilities.

      Further, which deregulation did Bush sign that directly caused the economy ‘off a cliff’?  The answer it NONE.  The deregulation that can be directly tied to the housing crisis and resulting financial collapse is the repeal of the 1933 Glass-Steagall act in 1999 by Bill Clinton.  This set up the banks to be ‘too big to fail’ and take undo risk.  Further the expansion of the CRA and active relaxation of borrowing requirements created a massive expansion of the subprime loans.

      Again. We are waiting for the specifics instead of a lame Obama talking point.

      • Steve__T

         You need to change your name to worried for Romney. Because you aint worried about America.

      • jpolock

        Perfect.  Add 30% to the deficit through tax cuts, another 30% by unfunded wars, another 30% by the recession itself.

        Now blame Social Security and Medicare, and cut them (and those pesky food stamps too, just for fun of course, since it is way less than ONE week of forever war)…while simultaneously doubling the Security/Millitary Industrial Complex…cause you’ll need THAT when the slothy “pleebs” rise up in protest…caused by poverty, hunger, depravity…but of course you wouldn’t know the meaning of those big college words…

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Out of curiosity, is there any way that caller Peggy would have voted for Romney?

    • J__o__h__n

      Not according to Romney.

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    Does Mr. Moore realize that to continue to get unemployment you have to prove that you are looking for a job? Does he REALLY think that people would rather spend a lot of time looking for a job so they can slack on the government dole than work?

    What percentage of the 1% pay no Social Security tax, no Medicare tax?

    WSJ = Murdock. ‘nuf said.

  • jim_thompson

    Your guest from the Wall St. Journal just doesn’t get it.  He seems to represent the most rapacious teaparty extreme views that are the GOP today.  People DO NOT lay around taking unemployment and foodstamps.  People want work.  They want work at sustainable wages.  Not $8. an hour jobs.  To think that anyone-in the midst of the worst economy since the Great Depression-are just “welfare queens” hanging around cause they can…-it is just ridiculous-this is why this GOP has got to go!

    Jim in Fort Mill,SC

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       The irony is Romney’s policies will create more ‘above’ minimum wage jobs and allow more people to get off of public assistance.

  • bencooncat

    Romney to the hungry: Let them eat cake…

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    Once more from this WSJ hack: Every president since WWII has gotten UI extended when unemployment has been at this level. R and D. Only now have the right-wing thrown a fit over it.

    Truck drivers, feel free to chime in about how much that business costs and pays now, v a decade ago, when Moore says “They won’t take a certain job at a certain salary”.

    And somehow when Moore says “Government will pay you $35,000 a year!” he exudes mistrust. I get more warm fuzzies from someone on a cheap cable TV commercial trying to buy my gold for cash, cash, cash!

    • Steve__T

       Don’t forget diesel used to be lower than regular gas by at least 20% because it cost less to manufacture, now it’s 15% higher than supreme, but the manufacturing is still the same cost.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Interesting point. I just mentioned truckers because Moore did, and only seemed to see from the employer’s point of view.

        Anecdotally I’ve read that it’s becoming much more of an owner-operator and contract field, which means someone has to show up with a $gawdknowshowmuch big-ass serious truck and pay all expenses simply to proverbially punch a clock, hook up a trailer, and get dollar #1.

        That’s what I call “uncertainty”, the bane of our economic betters.

        Funn how these are the smallbidnessmen our uberclass seems intent on showing some lurve, it is claimed.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

    One thing they never talk about  – this month billions will go out to people in the form of entitlements. Next month almost 100% of those billions are sitting where ever these folks have spent their money. Who’s really getting the handout?

    • geraldfnord

      That’s why it’s a stimulus…easy enough to understand if you are not a devotee of the Great God Market and live by stroking Its Elect.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       Figure out how to get that into an Obama ad. Maybe send it to one of the PACs.

      People who barely make as much as they need  (if that) spend 100% of it. People who make a lot more than they need spend little and “invest” the rest. They do NOT create jobs with it, they “invest”.

  • MrNutso

    Here is a good perspective of when people pay federal taxes.

    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/taxes-over-the-life-cycle/ 

  • Scott B

    The speaker needs to visit history and look at WHY so many millions of people are on food stamps? 

    “Generous”?!  There are people that have no income, but because they own their house are getting $20 @ month in food stamps.

    My family has been on Food Stamps, LIHEAP, and unemployment, etc because of George W Bush’s economy and I’d like the speaker to show me where we made $35K @ year.  We wish!  We had to figure out out spending to the penny, including for sales tax because diapers for a newborn (and into toddler) aren’t cheap, tax free, or unnecessary.

  • sickofthechit

    PEGGY, Don’t just vote for Obama.  Campaign for him.  Make sure everyone you know double-checks their registration early, then on election day help transport to the polls any and all who need it.

    We need to give Obama a mandate! and overwhelming majorities in the house and senate.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Some depend on the government for food and health care; some can supply that for themselves, but they depend non the government for well-regulated banks, well supervised roadways and lighting and airways for planes or for broadcasting your message, etc., etc.  The government does provide for the rich too.

  • https://openid.aol.com/opaque/862139a4-e557-11e1-bc17-000bcdcb2996 Webb Nichols

    What a joke. 47% of the US population is not “gaming” the system. Everybody who is unemployed is not a construction worker or a waiter or a hotel worker or a day laborer. 

  • kbeausoapbox

    Why is it Okay for Romney to say he pays “all the taxes required by law” and not a penny more than is legally due, but those who receive tax deferments and government programs are “dependent”? He sure seems to depend on those loopholes!

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/EAYKORTHSLPQEZFKXBJMXMV2IE Tony

    Typical that Americans do not like to hear the truth.  Most (75%) Obama supporters depend and expect the government to provide for their welfare.  The other 25% are the hosts of the 75%.

    • hennorama

      And the source of the data you base your “conclusion” on is ….?  Please, do go on with this enlightenment.

  • Michiganjf

    So Tom,

       “Many said Obama was playing on class warfare, just like Romney, eh?”

    Well, OBVIUOSLY we should give credence to everything Romney shills have been saying, it’s all been so reasonable, RIGHT??!!!

  • jpolock

    Unbelieveable!  The conservative on your show has the GALL to state that the left “has no concern for this trend” !!!$#%???

    What the heck do you think the left has been fighting for all these decades? Esp. the current Occupy movement.

    People with little to no money can not afford to pay these taxes (above and beyond the taxes they DO pay…Mitt, it’s more than 14%!)

    These same conservatives are the ones (like mitt) shipping jobs overseas, quashing unions, thus labor and good jobs, quashing wages and benefits.

    There is a DIRECT line between the reduction of unions and good pay jobs with benefits.  This is not a mistake or accident!

    The difference is that the left is trying to create good real jobs, vs. conservatives who are squeezing out profits.

    And trust you me, if this trend continues, it will end up as it has in EVERY civilization where the inequality has blown up to extremes: REVOLUTION.

  • Anita Paul

    People who pay Unemployment pay for it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=42303148 Aida G. Neary

    I suggest that everyone read last week’s Time magazine which shows that 100% of us are dependent on government benefits in some form or another.
    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2123809,00.html

    • William

       You mean taxpayer paid benefits right?

      • jpolock

        You mean living in a civilization right?

  • litekeep

    Get him Tom!  He’s just lying!!!

  • kaybee63

    And do they show up for work with their two year old special needs kid?

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    You elites are so full of it.

    WHERE ARE THE JOBS YOU IDIOT????????

    PUBLIC WORK JOBS YOU ARE FULL OF IT.

    Pay people for jobs that make sense.

    Not for sweeping the sidewalk.

    Idiot elite.

    • Steve__T

       wish I could like this twice, the man twists like a snake.

  • Jeff Weideman

    You’re FOS, that’s what I will agree on. You’re lying, and you’re fantasizing and you have no idea.

    WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU WERE ON UNEMPLOYMENT?

    And Remember JERK that Unemployment and Welfare are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

    Sorry but you’re a MORON.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

       He’s confused because the employed that couldn’t find jobs are now moving down to welfare if they can get it.

      It’s all the same to the tools of the criminal elite.

  • sickofthechit

    Even Romney as Governor of Mass applied for these same work requirement waivers. How is it that TOM didn’t bring this up.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    We should be concerned as a nation that the elite are running the ship into an iceberg.

  • Linda987

    Romney clearly has contempt for people who are not like him — which is a whole lot of the USA. He has contempt for people who don’t make as much money as he does, and for people who in hard times need some government help. What he’s denying and avoiding is the government welfare HE and his ilk DEMAND and depend on — tax dodges, deregulation, tax breaks which allow them to make a lot of money and not have to spend it for the betterment of the community, but rather, only for their benefit. Poor Romney, Welfare Recipient, who like a small child wants his way and doesn’t see what is actually happening.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    The whole world is in deflation you idiot.

    Stop comparing it to Reagen’s time.

  • MrNutso

    Why it’s 47%.  A great post.  Huge jumps in the number not paying federal income taxes after republican inspired tax cuts.

    http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/09/18/13939133-why-the-47-percent-is-so-large?lite 

  • Potter

     Moore is really asking for stimulus that his Republicans fought against.

  • JGC

    The timing for the release of this video is exquisite. I just received my absentee voting ballot in the mail a few days ago. Early voting is not far off in many states, and this will be fresh in every voter’s mind. 

  • Jeff Weideman

    BS, it took a decade to come out of the Depression. Reagan did not have this kind of recession so BS on your crap.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OGMNNTBQJCU6MBPAWQJ55ZYEXE Island

    So ridiculous that welfare is keeping people from going out and getting a job. There is a small percentage that have no interest in working but give me a work program, give me a job and I’ll work! I think most people are like that. 

  • rgore

    My husband was on unemployment and he worked really hard
    to get another job.  To say that people on unemployment won’t
    look for a job until their unemployment benefits run out was spoken by someone who has had the good fortune to not have to be on unemployment.  We could not live on his unemployment.  People are losing their homes and going hungry.

    • hennorama

      You’re absolutely right.  Glad your spouse was successful in his job search, and that your economic situation has stabilized and improved.

  • MaureenMC

    Take that seniors on social security, mothers struggling to feed their children,students wanting to go to college, people who are daily trying to find work with no success, handcapped & disabled children and adults, veterans of all our wars,…………………..      The president should care about 100% of the United States citizens. Especially those who are struggling. What kind of president doesn’t “care” about 47% of the people ? An elitist who has no idea what the majority of people deal with on a daily basis would a be a very scary president . To say the VERY least.            I want to see Mitt Romney forced to live on minimum wage for a year. WIth no help from anyone or any thing.

  • rvl1

    Mr. WSJ: What about corporate welfare? Are you in favor of letting the Bush tax cuts expire for the good of the country?

  • DrewInGeorgia

    Many Americans do have a strong work ethic despite the fact that their ‘employment’ more greatly resembles indentured servitude than it does self-support. I have never taken a dime of Federal or State Aid other than unemployment one time when laid off. Yet I am a Parasite because I pay no federal income tax when I have no income. Duh…

    • jpolock

      Exactly.  The hardest working people I’ve ever met rarely wear suit & ties!

      I’d love to see them working the overnight custodian shift at minimum wage, then go to their second “day” job in a warehouse, diner, or MalWart!

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Can I interest you in Barbara Ehrenreich’s “Nickeled and Dimed”?

        Not sure if it’s still print, but it’s never gone out of style.

        • jpolock

          Thanks, I know it well.  I’m forgetting the guys name right now, but he did “Supersize Me”..he also had a TV series, where he took on similar tasks..he did a living on min wage one once…very tough!

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            Morgan Spurlock, who also has some ability to do that kind of thing.

            Do you also miss Crackers, the Corporate Crime-Fighting Chicken?

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/MWNZAPU2H5ZH4C2QTATDJK7VV4 Democracy

    if the conservatives are worried about  half of the country not paying their taxes, then why in the hell have they signed the Norquist’s pledge of not raising taxes and not reducing the taxes for the rich?????
    they are such hypocrites!!!

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

       Don’t worry, taking away tax credits and deductions of anyone who’s not rich doesn’t count.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    “Any able-bodied person should work to get welfare benefits” per Moore.

    What about professionals? I thought that for people who wear dress shirts (or blouses) to work that searching for work was a full-time job.

  • Scott B

    The speaker is the guy from Bruce Hornsby’s song “The Way it Is” :

    Standin’ in line marking time
    Waiting for the welfare dime
    ‘Cause they can’t buy a job
    The man in the silk suit hurries by
    As he catches the poor old lady’s eyes
    Just for fun he says, ‘Get a job’

    This guy needs to get a reality check and try living like the 46% of us “freeloaders” that lost jobs, or never got raises while the price of everything increased.

  • NewtonWhale

    William Kristol: “Romney’s comments are “stupid and arrogant…Romney seems to have contempt not just for the Democrats who oppose him, but for tens of millions who intend to vote for him.”

    Then he suggests that Romney step down so “we get the Ryan-Rubio ticket we deserve!”

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/note-romney-s-arrogant-and-stupid-remarks_652548.html

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       William Kristol was the guy who actively promoted Sarah Palin as a VP pick.  His political instincts, frankly, stink.

      • NewtonWhale

        Yes, and they always have.

        But that hasn’t stopped Republicans like McCain from taking his advice.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       I just read that piece and Kristol says “it is important for Romney to win in November”.

      Most of the piece is about Obama’s comments in 2008 where Obama trashes a large part of the Democrat primary electorate.

      Nice try with your selective editing.

      • NewtonWhale

        The reason you were able to read the whole piece is because I included the link. 

        Obviously he wants Romney, a republican, to win: it’s William bloody Kristol, fer Pete’s sake. But he did, in fact, express a preference for “the Ryan-Rubio ticket we deserve!” And he did raise the possibility of Romney resigning so that could happen. 

        My editing did not change a thing he said. 

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Kristol has always had irrational disdain for Romney. But thanks for the link.  I enjoyed. it.

  • TomK_in_Boston

    This is great. Anyone who’s not blinded by ideology knows that Etchasketch is a vicious financial con man, a class warrior, a silver spoon baby who was born on third and thinks he hit a triple, and an opportunistic chameleon, but he’s supposed to do a better job of HIDING it!!!

    Everyone on this forum knows that whining about all the poor folks who don’t pay taxes is a standard righty talking point, repeated over and over by the righty ‘bots here. It’s their SOP – attack where they are weak. So, to take the focus off the astonishingly low tax rates (13%!!!) paid by oligarchs like Etcha, they go on attack about those who are so poor they have nothing to pay.

    Another funny thing is that the “47%” tend to live in the poor red states – they are his base! I wonder if they’re too dumb to figure out that he is talking about them?

    I hope everyone has heard “follow the money”. If you’re concerned about the deficit, want to look at a billionaire who should be paying 50% getting a free ride at 13%, or someone with nothing who is paying nothing?

    I also enjoyed hearing him he inherited nothing. Etchasketch, the self-made man. Daddy governor and CEO had nothing to do with his success. What scum.

    If this doesn’t sink him, after his unpatriotic remarks about Libya, we’re truly screwed. But I think he is finished, no matter how sheep-like some voters are.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Romney’s statement was about the statement released by the embassy in Egypt — not Libya.  And how was it unpatriotic?

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       I think you were doing well, until that last sentence.

    • Bruce94

      Good summary of the implications of Etcha’s most recent outrageous statement.  I agree, this revelation combined with the litany of other lies and contradictions he has graced us with, should be enough to sink his campaign.  At the very least it should be enough to fire up the Dem base and to recruit legions of volunteers who might begin to offset the huge financial advantage that Mitt and his minions enjoy. 

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Empathy is good only for winning votes.  Social policy has to be based on facts.

  • geraldfnord

    Mr Moore ignores—-or wants us to ignore—the fact that his preferred level of work requirement would seriously depress wages.

    I wish he would just return to ‘Then they should die and decrease the surplus population,” that served him so well once.

  • jpolock

    Sure, and this explains all the “hard working” folks in the deep (south) red states that get more from the Gov than they pay in, have higher rates of welfare etc, and pay way less taxes.

    GO BLUE!

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

       Blue states should demand their tax money back.

      Red states can live by their fanatical words.

      • William

        Don’t blue states get to deduct their state income taxes from the federal income taxes?

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

           So only blue states do that?

          • BHA_in_Vermont

            And the state of “Romney”. Maybe that is one of the “loopholes” Romney would get rid of.

        • jpolock

          From overall income…but EVEN so, the Blue states STILL pay in WAY MORE than the Reds!  HAHA!

          • William

             Just think if that little tax deduction went away? How would those blue states and their high state income taxes survive?

          • jpolock

            They would stop subsidizing the Reds…

          • hennorama

            Wait … someone’s subsidizing my NL Central-leading Cincinnati Reds?

            (Please excuse my attempt at levity)

        • hennorama

          Every Federal tax filer who itemizes has a choice – deduct state & local income taxes paid, or take the sales tax deduction.

          So — if you live in a state with no state income tax, you can deduct sales taxes.  Or if the state & local taxes you actually paid are lower than the sales tax deduction, you have that option.

          The sales tax deduction is available to you whether or not you actually PAID any sales taxes.  There is an IRS table based on your locality and income that lists the available ST deduction, regardless of whether you paid that amount or not.

          This was a gift from Bush II and Congress in 2004, to the predominatly “red” states that have no state income tax. Those states are Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washingtona & Wyoming.

  • Rex Henry

    I honestly think there’s a lot of truth in what he said. Given the details of the event and the presentation of the message, it comes off a little bit harsh. 

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Obama’s comment was as bad as Romney’s.  Obama dismissed a large segment of the American population with his own contempt.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Further, Obama made his statement during a Democrat primary so he was dissing Democrats AND everyone else.  A much larger percentage of the population than 47%.

    • hennorama

      Yes yes a familiar tactic – “My guy said some crazy indefensible ‘not elegantly stated’ stuff, but look over here at the indefensible stuff the other guy said 4 years ago.”

      Nice try.

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

         I’d like to throw out both the Democan and the Republicrat parties.  Good enough?

  • Scott Lemire

    Stephen Moore is right on…..and Tom saying, “I don’t have a dog in this fight…” is rubbish. 

  • ThirdWayForward

    Conservatives are intellectually dishonest when they parrot these talking points about who pays taxes and who is getting a free ride. 

    On one hand they bemoan 47% of the population who pay no federal income taxes (but who do pay into Social Security, Medicare, gas tax, local and state taxes). 

    Then they turn around and smear recipients of Social Security, Medicare, and other programs as moochers. These are not “entitlement” programs in the original sense of the term — recipients have paid for these benefits over their working careers. They DESERVE those benefits, and they are getting their money’s worth. Medicare is much more efficient  than private health insurance.

    What is amazing is the sense of entitlement that the uber-rich have — Romney thinks it’s perfectly all right to evade taxes by hiding his assets and income overseas. Ryan’s plan is designed to give the 0.1% even more breaks. 

    Is there any doubt whose interests the Republican Party pursues?

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/IU5RB5G2QJEYBKKWY7ZJSWF4AQ Glenda

    I am on SS. but still pay taxes on both that and my teacher retirement. I still resent that I pay taxes to help people who wear false fingernails, are many pounds overweight and smoke cigarettes  but get food stamps and many free and reduced benefits.  Why should we furnish anyone free cell phones???? How ridiculous. I think Romney speaks the truth.   

    • Crystal Humphries

      So what you are trying to say is “you like to take hand outs?!”

    • Jeff Weideman

      No Glenda, you’ve bought into the Republican lie hook, line and sinker.

    • coach777b

      One of the worst traits of the haters is ENVY & GREED as illustrated in this posting. There are people who for the first time in their lives find themselves jobless. They have families and homes but are poised to lose even that meager portion of life. Who do they turn to? Their church, their unions, their families or their government.
      If you are so upset about a person with food stamps having a cellphone or false fingernails, you have a bigger problem than is stated here.

      • jpolock

        You are right, but this is worse than envy & greed.  Looks more to me what I heard someone discribe John Bolton as: “The classic kiss up kick down kind of guy”

        This is a classic example of I’ve got mine, F everyone else…and I’m pulling up the ladder…

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/IU5RB5G2QJEYBKKWY7ZJSWF4AQ Glenda

        I do not envy or hate anyone. I simply think government is doing things it was never intended to do.  I doubt our fore fathers would be at all pleased with our present day government.  I worked Employment Security when Johnson started his great society and have seen how more and more people are dependent on the government.  Look at the graphs of aid to dependent children, food stamps etc etc.  This did not really abate during the greatest economic times we had under Clinton.  I certainly am for people getting temporary help during times of high unemployment but to live off of the  government forever is not acceptable.

    • jpolock

      Horrified that your were ever a “teacher”.

      Clearly you have a major wisdom deficit.

      Too bad we can’t recind those “leftist” benefits that liberals and unions fought and bled for you to get…

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      False fingernails? Smokers? Overweight?

      You seem to know a lot about the 1% we bailed out.

    • hennorama

      Yes, and what about their cars, and TVs, and refrigerators, and microwaves and the fast food “they” eat  and blah blah blah blah …

      Perhaps, rather than feeling resentful, you could consider yourself fortunate and count your blessings.

      Ever EVER hear of the word “empathy?”

      Please.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

      Oh you angel. Hope your SS gets cut.

  • dt03044

    Thank you Tom for pushing back against Mr. Moore’s assertions. The idea that people would prefer to be unemployed and on food stamps is ridiculous.  Those programs are temporary assistance until folks get back to work, which won’t happen until the economy improves.

  • Jeff Weideman

    Stephen Moore, you’re a clueless dip****.

  • adks12020

    The people that run around saying that the majority of people on welfare actually want to be are ignorant.  I’ve seen many people in the grocery checkout line trying to hide the fact that they are swiping the ebt card.  They are often proud people that have hit on hard times.  They take the benefits because they need them to survive, take care of their children, etc.  Sure some people game the system but that isn’t the majority. That viewpoint is completely bogus. 

    • Denis

      and many of the haves have because they gamed the system!

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    The elites made a big mistake putting Romney up for president.

    The people of this country are going to start hating them instead of each other.

  • MaureenMC

    Take that seniors on social security, mothers struggling to feed their children,students wanting to go to college, people who are daily trying to find work with no success, handcapped & disabled children and adults, veterans of all our wars,…………………..
     The president should care about 100% of the United States citizens. Especially those who are struggling. What kind of president doesn’t “care” about 47% of the people ? An elitist who has no idea what the majority of people deal with on a daily basis would a be a very scary president . To say the VERY least.            I want to see Mitt Romney forced to live on minimum wage for a year. With no help from anyone or anything. And no inheritance.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       ” I want to see Mitt Romney forced to live on minimum wage for a year. With no help from anyone or anything. And no inheritance.”

      Yep, I’ve said that myself. He can start with $500, a change of clothes and nothing else. You would think a guy married to a cancer survivor and with MS would have a puny bit of compassion for others. But he is so far up in the clouds he has no idea how much differently the 99% deal with diseases such as those suffered by his wife. Just write a check to the best doctors in the world, it is easy. 

      Romney only cares about those that will vote for him.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        I refer you to Barbara Ehrenreich’s “Nickeled and Dimed”.

        It’s the “Sullivan’s Travels” of the degree-having class. And I don’t think Mitt would survive it for a week.

  • sk8sonh2o

    They may not pay taxes but they send their kids to war

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

       If Romney wins and starts a war with Iran we as a nation must demand that HIS FIVE SONS GO GET BLOWN TO BITS FIRST. And that he pays 80 or 90 percent in taxes to pay for his stupid war.

  • Denis

    Where did this Wall Street Journal guy come from?   Has he actually done any research to support what he says?  My sister has been looking for work… any work for more than two years and not had success.  She does not blame President Obama.  She knows the deadlock has to do with the obstructionist republicans in congress. 

  • TinaWrites

    Compare rich Romney with wealthy and empathetic F.D. Roosevelt and his utterly compassionate wife Eleanor Roosevelt…… 

  • Frizbane Manley

    I’m a Mitt kind-a guy; I’m a maker …

    But she votes for Barack; she’s a taker.

    Forty-seven percent

    Are behind on the rent

    I’ll vote Mitt! … he’s a mover and shaker.

  • http://twitter.com/TheAncientRando The Ancient Rando

    African-Americans, Hispanics, liberals, single and college-educated women, and union households make up roughly 46% of the electorate and they are by and large Obama’s base. What Mitt’s little fundraising talk told them is that they are unworthy of being one of us. 

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/BXD4WBP4GIDANFN24P6WED6NBQ john

    My family is a part of the 47 percent here in Vermont. We have a two year old son, and both started small businesses within the past 3 years. We’re not on welfare, but the tax incentives, along with our hard work, are a piece of the equation that will allow us to make the necessary investments to increase our incomes!

    • hennorama

      Congrats, and good luck with your businesses!

  • TinaWrites

    Tom!  Thank you for doing this show right away!  And, thank you so much for challenging the falsehoods posing as facts!!!

  • TinaWrites

    Mother Jones:  Thank you for your terrific public service!!!

  • janrichter

    Let’s be clear about who the 47% are, based on the original Tax Policy Center study. Many assume if you don’t pay taxes, you’re on welfare. This is wrong. About half of the 47% pay no federal income taxes because their incomes are too low once they make standard deductions for themselves and their dependents. Among the other 25% or so, half are retirees (elderly) and the other half are working families with children. To say those who are retired or those who work full-time and earn low wages are on welfare is just wrong, and un-American.

    • jimino

      I haven’t been able to listen to the show yet.  Did they talk about the number of active-duty military families that are in the 47%?

      • janrichter

        I only caught the tail end and heard a caller ranting about people on welfare, as if all 47% were low-lifes not working. Years ago I heard that many military families are on food stamps because their wages are so low – i assume you have a point about military families.Jan Subject: [on-point] Re: Romney And The ‘Dependent’ 47 Percent

  • Adrian_from_RI

    No wonder that the lefties are all up in arms about Romney’s remarks because he stated the obvious. Romney at Bain was a wealth creator and he speaks for the Makers big – like Staples – and small – like my favorite breakfast place. Obama speaks for the Takers and destroys wealth with “investments” like Solyndra. The Obama supporters believe that the duty of the government is to take from each according to his ability and provide to each according his needs. History shows us what that gets you.

    • jpolock

      Too bad what you say is so completely false…absurdly so. 

      Go ahead and vote Red, let the “pleebs” fester…they’ll come for you eventually…when the power goes out, the heat goes up, and the food runs out….

    • dirq

       As people were saying for the past hour, the problem with the video, the problem “lefties” (that is, the 0-47th income percentile) have is less with Romney’s principles, and much more with the amount of contempt Romney showed for people who haven’t hit it as big as he has. As you are showing about the same amount of contempt, you probably didn’t get that part.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       B.S. Keep listening to Rush.

      “Makers” like Bain are wealth creators for those that already have so much wealth they can afford to gamble with it. They will still be rich if they lose it all.

      I am an Obama supporter. I pay a higher tax rate than Mitt Romney and I can’t tilt my head far enough back to see the 1% at the top.

      • sickofthechit

         ”Bane” was not into gambling.  They loaded up the takeover targets with debt then took their bonuses and high-tailed it out of there before the @$#% hit the fan.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

          Yep. Like any casino, the most money is to be made from an honest game where the gamers are guaranteed to lose, bit by bit, fractions at a time.

          At that point the house doesn’t have to “cheat”; hell, it’s counterproductive!

    • Satwa

      Most of the 47 % not paying taxes are Republicans and Tea Party people

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        I don’t know about “most”.

        But I do agree with you that the characterization of that segment as “Obama voters who will never support Romney” (and the conviction with which Romney said this) shows quite the tin ear.

        Ignorance of the demand sinkhole, which poses a much greater threat to the working class than to folks Romney chooses to hobnob with, is not something a “world class CEO” should brag about.

        We are getting closer to a great-depression like reverberation of lack of demand, and on “average” it doesn’t matter, as the rich who had hardly had a recession can’t barely find new things to buy with their money, or profitable places to invest it, because many of the rest of us haven’t had a raise since the beginning of the Bush II recovery.

        If Romney wants to be the president of all of us, he’s doing a great job of hiding it.

    • William

       What is really interesting is this is the new item that political leaders can’t discuss. Add it to entitlement reform, race, school vouchers, illegal immigrants, etc…the list is getting so long it makes me wonder what will our political leaders actually try and fix.

  • HopeLeeson

    Two Points:

    Mitt Romney and his campaign entourage are trying to create a divide between the middle class and those who don’t make enough to meet the income limit required for payment of income tax. My husband and I both work at full time jobs, my husband owns his own small business, and 30% of our income goes toward tax payments. We are Obama supporters.

    When Republicans make claims about the poor rate of recovery, they fail to acknowledge the fact that this depression is WORLDWIDE and we are now a GLOBAL economy. Why don’t they get called out on this?

  • nbrockway

    Tom – you are usually a fair and balanced reporter/interviewer, and yet you’ve let Steven Moore, evidently an irrational blowhard, take up lots of time on the air.  You asked this pro-Romney guest many times where the jobs are, and he refused to answer. He refused to take your point that Republican Governors were prominent among those who asked for the waivers that he criticized Romney for giving.   He refused to take your point and Mr. Corn’s and that of some pro-Obama commenters to the effect that Romney in effect characterized seniors, members of the military, people impoverished by the Great Recession and others are moochers, unwilling to take care of themselves.  I guess the only saving grace of having him on and giving him this time on air is that his failure to take your points and reply is evidence of his shallow shilling for Gov. Romney’s disgusting opinions.
    Nancy Brockway (An Obama supporter who pays a higher percentage of taxes on the income from my truly small business than Mr. Romney has.  A member of the 57% who is outraged at Mr. Romney’s dismissal of half the population.)

    • sickofthechit

       She’s part of the 53%, not 57%.

  • Prairie_W

    I don’t think there’s been a single instance over the past several years that I’ve heard Stephen Moore that he hasn’t made a fool of himself.  Every time I think, Jeez! He works for the Wall Street Journal! Maybe he’s just having a bad day..! 

    And then, once again, I remember who now publishes the WSJ.

    It would be wonderful if NPR would stop pulling Moore into discussion programs.  He uses circular reasoning; his choice of “facts” is always narrow and politically driven; he actually (see truck driver employment meme) uses Foxisms (as reliable as paroxysms) as “proof” of his spurious claims.  And, for crying out loud, he whines!

    Quoth this Raven:  Never Moore!

    • gonkers

      Is this the Steven Moore who used to work for Heritage or Cato who churned out those phony studies on how tax cuts for the rich perform economic miracles? If so On Point should never have this hack on again as a guest.

      • jimino

        I have seen and heard him on many occasions over the years and he is invariably out-debated by every other person with whom he appears.  But Moore is good natured and shameless in the face of his obvious ignorance and deceit, and apparently continues to be paid by the WSJ or some entity despite his clear incompetence, so is the perfect fool to be trotted out in these types of discussions.

      • Joseph_Wisconsin

         Another study showing that tax cuts for the wealthy do not produce economic growth.  Such cuts have been remarkable for producing income inequality and concentration of wealth though.  So the real purpose behind the Republican push for this has been realized.

        http://graphics8.nytimes.com/news/business/0915taxesandeconomy.pdf

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

       Any WSJ employee should be disqualified because of who their employer is.

      When Rupurt Murdoch bought the WSJ I stopped reading it because I knew that it’s editorial would read like Mein Kamp.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Your loss.  That’s all.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

           Really? What have I lost except a distorted criminal elite view on the world?

  • hennorama

    Perhaps Mr. Romney should form a new political party – “The HAVES”

    Haughty
    Arrogant
    Vile
    Egotistical
    SOBs

    • sickofthechit

       Don’t forget the “Have Mores”

      Haughty
      Arrogant
      Vile
      Egotistical
      SOBs

      Money
      Only
      Rewards
      Egotistical
      SOBs

  • Thinkin5

    Pres. Obama has been taking China to task. Romney is lying again. “But the administration noted that it’s taken several enforcement actions
    against China with the WTO since Obama took office in 2009, including
    those involving export restraint on raw materials and antidumping and
    countervailing duties on flat-rolled steel.”

  • Martin G. Evans

    Another point to make

    the stagnant wages of the bottom 80% over the past twenty years have reduced the government tax take.

    See my piece in the Providence Journal

    http://martingevans.blogspot.com/2011/07/stagnant-wages-foregone-income-taxes.html

  • gonkers

    Romney’s contempt for 47% of the population is obvious enough. He may believe what he says or maybe it’s just part of a cynical attempt to divide the nation with a cynical narrative of the parasites who want “free stuff” vs the noble “producers”.

    What is being skipped over in this show are Romney’s scandalous remarks about Israel and the Palestinians.

    Romney may try to conceal it, but he is a religious zealot, a bishop in his church and an past evangelizer for the faith. I have no problem with that.

    But where I draw the line is when religious zealots seek office and bring that baggage with them. I certainly don’t want in office a person with their hand on the launch button someone who believes we need a nuclear Armageddon to usher in the Second Coming. Such beliefs disqualify someone from the office.  

    In Romney’s case I don’t know if he believes there’s a need for a war in the Mideast to bring on a Second Coming. Maybe someone more knowledgeable on his Mormon faith can answer that. But his beliefs that the Palestinian people don’t want peace, only the destruction of Israel, certainly disqualify him from being a fair broker of a desperately needed peace deal. It really is the key to cooling down the radicalization of the Muslim world.

  • hennorama

    I’m posting this now (again) so it’s nearer the top of the list and stands alone rather than as a reply:

    “ I feel an obligation to add something to this discussion of who pays Federal income taxes (FIT), and who does not.

    To begin with, let’s be sure we understand the terms being used.  It is more precise to use “those who have income” rather than “taxpayers” or even “tax filers.”

    The figure most commonly cited as “nearly half” is 46%.  Let’s call them “the 46%.”

    Next, no one votes on taxes directly.  Congress makes tax laws, not the voters and not the President, either.

    Of those who have income, many of the 46% who pay no FIT are either the youngest or oldest among us.  They are either just entering the workforce and economy, or have worked and contributed to the economy for most of their lives.

    Each year, there are also over 1,000 people with income over $1,000,000 who pay no Federal income tax.

    Amongst the 46%, half have income so low that they owe no FIT after they subtract their standard deduction and exemptions.

    The other half of the 46% qualify for various tax breaks, both non-refundable and refundable, resulting in no net FIT.

    Just wanted to make sure we have common terms and facts, nothing more.  I make no comment on the merits of the above.

    One additional point.

    Let’s assume the answer is “Yes, everyone should pay at least one dollar ($1) in tax.”

    First, we would need to define “everyone.” Do you mean every person living in the US? Every citizen? Everyone over the age of 12? What happens if I fit the definition and I have negative income (a loss)?

    OK, so let’s say this is defined in some way. It starts to get wobbly at the extremes. What happens if I’m part of “everyone”, and my income is $1, or $10, or $100?

    Should I still pay my $1?”

  • dirq

    So much for the argument “Romney’s a nice guy, but he’s just a little out of touch”.  This video, where he’s showing what appear to be a lot of real sentiments, and “a little out of touch” ain’t even close.  As for “nice guy”- now he just seems like a jerk.

  • Jeff Weideman

    Stephen Moore flat out lied to you all.

    IF YOU’RE COLLECTING UNEMPLOYMENT YOU ARE REQUIRED TO ACTIVELY SHOW YOU’RE SUBMITTING RESUMES AND ARE REQUIRED TO TAKE ANY JOB THAT SEARCH GETS YOU. IF YOU DO NOT YOU WILL STOP RECEIVING YOUR CHECK.

    Stephen Moore is either clueless or a flat out liar, either way he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Maybe Stephen Moore, if he reads this, will take the opportunity to actually educate himself before trying to sound like an expert.

    • jpolock

      Not to mention that you either personally paid into unemployment INSURANCE, or your employer did!

      When your house burns, and you get an insurance check, is that “welfare”?

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

       Facts don’t matter to the tools of the criminal elite.

      We the listeners need to demand that these liars not be given airtime.

      • Steve__T

         NO we need to hear what they say that information is valuable.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

          Say no to disseminating their lies.

        • hennorama

          With comments coming in so crazyfast earlier, I didn’t comment.  I agree with you 100%.  Let’s get as many viewpoints as possible on important topics.  The asshats out themselves, and do provide some entertainment value, to boot.

          “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.” – Justice Louis D. Brandeis

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      Stephen Moore isn’t writing to people on unemployment. His audience isn’t the sort who’s met by security guards and given a copy-paper box to put their belongings in when they show up and discover they no longer have a job.

      He’s as insulated as Romney is. The difference is Moore doesn’t have to convince 50%+1 to vote for him.

  • TinaWrites

    This much is obvious: the Republicans call Obama the Food Stamp President because so many people lost their jobs due to outsourcing and replacement by robotics (which the Republicans don’t mention) which increased the dividends to the investors, and increased CEO pay and benefits, but which depleted the funds of the workers, thus putting workers in a precarious position when it comes to feeding their families.  Even tho that’s true, the Republicans blast right past the truth and blame the result on the President, knowing their snarky tone will find receptive ears.  But, the Republicans ALSO call Obama the Food Stamp President because it gets them very subtle points with the racists whose prejudices they love to juice up while they solicit their votes!  Not all Republicans are racist, but the Party is not about to turn away racist votes, and often seems to court them.  

  • burroak

         Interesting, unempathetic rhetoric that further polarizes and divides American citizens at time when our great country is struggling to rebuild the middle class. It might have been wiser to discuss ideas and programs that can help the 47 percent.
         Governor Romney has gone from bullying to Baining to baffelling. 

    • Prairie_W

       Quite apart from agreeing with you, I’m crazy about your “name”!

    • http://www.facebook.com/letty.horan Letty Horan

      The EIC DOES help some in the 47%, its too late to make 75 year olds work some more to bring their income up, and the food and shelter we provide the troops in Afghanistan is all tax free now.  What can you do to help the 47%?  Free college education would help the parents who are TEMPORARILY using this deduction.  No more programs please–we need to define who the 47% are and keep helping them til their kids grow up, they die or they finish their service obligations.  And we should all shut up. 

  • L_R_Dunn

    This most recent show prompted by Romney’s 47% comment was completely worthwhile.

    What is most telling concerning our current great divide is the right wing’s consistent attempt, even still, to foist Social Darwinism on We The People as part of HUGE MONEY’s ‘Free Speech’ imprinting drumbeat scorched America – Dreamland Fantasy – as policy.

    • TinaWrites

      And Citizens United gives them way too much power in elections!  The ONLY power we have is the one we MAY take for granted, especially with all this anti-government verbiage out there, but we must not!!!  WE MUST VOTE!!!  WE are supposed to BE the force behind the government!  

  • col2002

    Ok- so let’s take a look at our tax code. Just like Mitt, I got a tax deduction for my mortgage, that brought down my tax liability. Mitt Romney got a 77,000 deduction for his horse!

    colleen

    • TomK_in_Boston

      The reality is this: The talking point about the “47%” is designed to deflect attention from the fact that oligarchs like Etchasketch are paying a 13% rate, unprecedented since 1929!

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        But 1929 was such a good year!

        Well, about 10 months of it.

    • TinaWrites

      Yet I couldn’t deduct the cost of my cancer meds last year because they did not cost enough, even tho they brought me to my KNEES!  The percentage that basic expenses cost is higher in lower income people, thus making a situation like mine possible; i.e., my OTHER expenses were already too high to allow me to easily cover the cost of my meds; then my meds were not high enough compared to my income, even tho it felt like that expense was squeezing every last penny out of me.  Romney’s horse is a deductible way AFTER he has easily covered his basic expenses!  

      • hennorama

        I’m very sorry about your illness.  Nothing that we type and read in here is more important than one’s health.  I hope you are recovered or on your way to recovery, and wish you only the best of fortune and a long future.

        • TinaWrites

          Thank you very much for your kind wishes!  I bring up my illness on these pages a lot because I don’t think a lot of people really understand how extraordinarily expensive some illnesses and accidents can be.  My family has had an awful lot of experience with illnesses and accidents, so I try to speak from experience, adding my testimony to that of others, so that our national policy discussions might be based on what can happen, not on wishful thinking and/or falling prey to political  Spin.  We were a family who did our best to live healthy lives; yet Stuff Happened.  When we are judged as a nation, what will we find? Were we wise?  

          • hennorama

            You are quite welcome, of course. Expressing condolence was the least I could do. I appreciate you sharing these difficult experiences in an effort to humanize the debate. Comments in these forums can be rude, crude, uncaring and unempathetic at times, which makes your bravery in sharing your stories even more poignant.

            Again, best wishes and best regards.

          • TinaWrites

            Thank you again.  Your words let me know that I have helped.  I’m losing stamina, so I may not be able to keep up with my postings, but I’m glad that the ones I did send found a responsive audience.  Your ability to empathize is a gift!  

        • TinaWrites

          I sent you a reply, about a week after you posted this (my stamina had left me high and dry), but now I don’t see it.  I said:

          Thank you very much for your kind wishes!  
          I went on to say that I post things about my family’s illnesses and accident to add to the testimony about what we really have to think about when we think about public health care and health insurance policy.  It’s late now, though, so I won’t try to duplicate what I said.  The most important part was that I wanted to thank you!  I hope you see this. 

  • Justin Whittier

    Tom, I love you, but you really dropped the ball on this one. First of all, there should have been an economically competent guest on to challenge Mr. Moore’s claims. Second, I know there was less prep time for this story, but a brief overview of the relevant facts was in order: Food stamps — more added under Bush (http://www.factcheck.org/2012/01/newts-faulty-food-stamp-claim/), real wages for Americans stagnating and income inequality rising since the ’70s (http://www.epipolicycenter.org/blm-stagnant_wages_and_rising_inequality.pdf), etc. 

  • NewtonWhale

    Annie Lowrey explains where those 47% (really, 46%) of Americans who don’t pay federal income tax come from. Answer? Seniors, and the working poor, and beneficiaries of the Bush tax cuts:

    Moreover, the Bush tax cuts – the signature Republican economic policy of the 2000s, which doubled the child tax credit, increased a number of other deductions and exemptions, and lowered marginal tax rates – erased millions of families’ federal income tax liabilities.

    So in this election we have a battle between those who want to kill the Bush tax cuts for rich while keeping the ones for the middle class, and those who want to increase the Bush tax cuts for the rich, while eliminating the ones on the middle class.

    http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2012/09/killing-bush-tax-cuts-for-middle-class.html

    • TomK_in_Boston

      Don’t forget financial con men who hide their income.

      • Brandstad

        Like Reid and Peolosi and the DNC Chair!

  • hennorama

    Prediction: this topic will generate more comments than any other this year, by far.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

      Huffington Post is over 100,000 which I believe would be a record by far for them.

      • MrNutso

        The comments are coming so fast there they can’t get them posted.

        • DrewInGeorgia

          Can’t get them posted or can’t get them moderated?

          ;’)

          • MrNutso

            I just observed the that there were just seconds between posts and the number of posts that were pending.

      • Brandstad

        There are a lot of unemployed people out there that want to be heard since the Obama Administration clearly hasn’t listend to them yet.

        MAKE IT EASIER FOR BUISNESS TO CREATE JOBS!!!  WE DON’T WANT TO BE DEPENDENT ON OTHERS!

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/VI5OY2GSFPBZNOR5IMJJCEGFNE KumarN

    These remarks, and the upcoming laborious justifications of them that Romney will try to proffer, mark the beginning of the end of his campaign as it tailspins into a well-deserved, wide-margin defeat.  Nobody can lead a nation without love and compassion for all citizens.  These heart-less comments came from the depths of his off-the-cuff real heart!  His donors will now be throwing good money after the bad, of which they have plenty, all made purely without mooching off of anyone else, out of thin air. 

    The rest of their campaign will now become farcical, just you watch!

    • sickofthechit

       We all still need to get out, double check our registration, vote and help others with transport to the polls.  Obama needs a mandate and a majority in both chambers to get this mess straightened out.

      • hennorama

        Regardless of your party, register and then vote.  And if you don’t vote, don’t complain.

        When I do non-partisan voter registration work, one of my best lines is “Sign up here for the right to complain about the government!”  Works pretty well.

    • DrewInGeorgia

      The rest of their Campaign? This entire Cycle has been like a never-ending trip to a Ringling Brothers’ Show.

  • hennorama

    The fastest growing income segment who pay no FIT (Fed. Income Tax) have incomes in the $75,000 to $100,00 range,

    Just FYI

    “The 47%” Romney talks about are not monolithic.  They are a BROAD range of people:

    Lower income
    Middle income with kids, education expenses, mortgages, etc.
    High income with excellent tax advisors
    Young people just starting out
    Seniors collecting Soc.Sec. after working all their lives
    Military servicemembers fighting overseas
    People who adopt and receive an Adoption Credit

    ALL races and ethnic backgrounds.  ALL religious backgrounds.  ALL political parties.  ALL ALL ALL

    Thanks for showing your true colors, Mr. Romney.  Now please bow out with what’s left of your dignity.

  • TomK_in_Boston

    David Brooks:

    “Romney’s comments also reveal that he has lost any sense of the social compact. In 1987, during Ronald Reagan’s second term, 62 percent of Republicans believed that the government has a responsibility to help those who can’t help themselves. Now, according to the Pew Research Center, only 40 percent of Republicans believe that.”

    Amen. It’s time to consign the radical version of the GoP to the trash heap of history.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      Even Bobo isn’t trying to rewrite that slice of history, isn’t trying to pretend things haven’t changed on the right’s side of the aisle?

      Wowsers.

    • DrewInGeorgia

      Only 40% profess to believe that. Actually believe it? Bet the percentage is much lower. just eavesdrop on some ‘Behind Closed Doors’ benefits to hear the truth.

  • gonkers

    Here’s the GOP’s cynical logic. They brag about taking 5 million off the tax rolls in 2001 as they recklessly cut taxes to deprive the Treasury of revenue to “starve the beast”. They then claim these tax cuts, designed to help mainly the rich, are actually unfair to the rich because they are now paying a bigger share of the remaining taxes.

    Are they paying more in actual taxes?

    Nope.

    In inflation corrected dollars, income tax revenues during Bush’s eight years never exceeded Clinton’s last year yet the GOP tells us “there’s no revenue problem”. 

    When the predictable fiscal damage is done by these reckless tax cuts, or an economic collapse their policies caused, they then accuse the poor of not paying enough, they don’t have “skin in the game”, and again how the system is “unfair” to the rich. 

    Their “solution” is to raise taxes back up on the poor even as they seek to cripple the safety net, while calling for more tax cuts for the rich to make the system “fair” to them.

    It’s difficult to understand how in a highly educated nation anyone can fall for this insane logic. That’s why there’s Fox… to spin the phony narratives that make the absurd make sense.

    • TinaWrites

      I know!  That the twisted, circular logic is as widespread as it is, thanks to Faux News and WSJ and then certain websites that Conservatives learn to go to — it all seems way too dystopian!!!  And yet, in high school, back in the mid-1960′s, we had readings we were supposed to consume that suggested that all this was coming.  I found it  too depressing and fled to reading about the past rather than about the projected future.  Reading Dickens showed the worst and the best in mankind, and I KNEW that things had gotten better in so many parts of the world.  With Eleanor Roosevelt urging us on TV since I was about 5, to “help the starving children of the world”, I was convinced that people would respond and the world would get better and certainly more fair.  I didn’t know the term economic equality, but I knew the word and concept of fair.  It all seemed like a positive trajectory toward the Better.  Now, I’m so much older, and I’ve become more aware of just how unfair the world can be.  But, I’ve never heard such twisted logic within my own lifetime, altho…… no!  I’m WRONG on that!  The twisted logic of racial discrimination was not all around me where I grew up, but it was discernible when we went south to visit grandparents.  Jim Crow was as massively immoveable a piece of false syllogisms and circular false reasoning as the language and stance of today’s Republicans, only Jim Crow also included that cruelest form of vigilantism (I won’t even name it!).  We HAVE been here before, trapped inside a gigantic tunnel of False Thinking!  I didn’t live under the thumb of Jim Crow, but my grandparents did and millions of other Americans did, constantly hearing the Falsehoods of the Dominant Culture, constantly affected by it.  If the Republicans get in, things could get worse, and for millions of Americans right now things are already at the Nadir of Worse!  And some of these millions are also the very same people who already suffered thru Jim Crow.  Mitt Romney has no sense of American history.  Mitt Romney has no Shame.  Dystopia:  the United States HAS been there before.  We’re hearing the strains of the language that helps to propel it.  We MUST parse the language until we see what it really means!

      • Steve__T

        Yes I heard it said recently that if you work hard you will get to the top and be wealthy. Slaves were the hardest working ever. So……?

  • Bruce94

    When conservatives cite federal income tax receipts as evidence that the wealthy are bearing a disproportionate burden of government, this is simply a ruse.

    If you consider other federal levies like the payroll tax as well as all state and local taxes (mostly regressive), it is very disingenuous to argue that the wealthy in the U.S. bear an excessive tax burden.

    Accounting for all taxes paid, the effective rate for our wealthiest 1% equals approximately 31% while the effective rate for the remaining 99% amounts to roughly 29% of income.  The reason that the wealthiest 1% have paid an increasing share of the federal tax burden is that the share of national income accruing to them has grown faster than their average tax rate has fallen over the past three decades.  In the 1970′s the income share of the highest earning 1% was around 8%; it now hovers at nearly 25%.

    We should learn from the failure of Reagan and Bush’s supply-side experiments, and recognize that income inequality and lack of social mobility would be exacerbated by the adoption of conservative proposals like making the Bush-era tax cuts permanent, eliminating estate taxes, and allowing the wealthy to shift even more of their income to capital gains taxed at the lower rate of 15%.

    • TomK_in_Boston

      It’s absurd to say the oligarchs are bearing all the burden. All that matters is the tax RATE, and all their smoke is designed to deflect attention from the top rate. It’s second lowest since 1929, and financial con men like romney who get to claim all their income as divs and cap gains pay 15%, the  lowest. Etchasketch even got his down to 13%.

      Don’t forget, the estate tax has been gutted, too.

      The more the income flows to the top, the greater the share of income tax the elites will pay. If ALL the income went to 100 oligarchs, they would pay 100% of the income tax, and the sheep would be deeply concerned about the huge burden on the “job creators” :)

      • Bruce94

        Good points…As for Mitt’s tax rate, we are still awaiting those returns.  If in the aftermath of the 2008 crash, Mitt was able to write-off or offset massive losses against gains, it’s possible that his actual rate was well below 15% or 13%.  I think it could be the case that he legally paid little or no taxes thanks to how the federal tax code treats income from gains and losses.

        I don’t believe he or his financial advisors were immune from the same hubris and myopia that many other sophisticated investors displayed during the “irrational exuberance” leading up to the housing debacle and subsequent recession.  I don’t understand how anyone could trust or respect what he says about his own finances while he continues to stonewall and refuses to release more than a year or two of tax returns.

        Just another example of the privileged expecting preferential treatment, ignoring the example of nearly every other candidate who has aspired to the highest office, and confirming that as a member of the oligarchy, Mitt feels ”entitled” to get a pass on his tax records.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    The elites outsource our jobs to China or anywhere else that pays slave wages and imports foreigners to take our jobs and drive down wages.

    Then they call us moochers when we can’t find jobs.

    EAT THE RICH.

  • William

     A big problem is some people don’t realize that government is the taxpayer.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001396180434 Lawrence Rowswell

    Is there a longer excerpt available?  Or the entire seventy minutes? 

    • sickofthechit

       Corn said there is more, but that this is the “juiciest”.  I’m hoping there are more juicy tidbits and that they get leaked out weekly up until election time…

  • TomK_in_Boston

    David Brooks:

    “Romney’s comments also reveal that he has lost any sense of the social compact. In 1987, during Ronald Reagan’s second term, 62 percent of Republicans believed that the government has a responsibility to help those who can’t help themselves. Now, according to the Pew Research Center, only 40 percent of Republicans believe that.”

    Amen. It’s time to consign the radical version of the GoP to the trash heap of history.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       It’s OK.  David Brooks still likes the crease in Obama’s pants.

  • hennorama

    Thanks so much Mr. Romney.  Your comments show you do not understand even the most basic thing about the name of our country: UNITED States of America

    • Brandstad

      Your comments show you don not understand how to make a basic point.  What most basic thing are you talking about!?!?

      • Steve__T

         The main subject we are talking about that you have no clue of. If you ever did.

  • JanDana

    I am among the 47 percent who support Obama and am just as dependent on government as Romney. 

    I like a secure environment. We both pay for the health care of the indigent who show up at hospitals who can’t pay. 

    We both try to get the govt to subsidize our lifestyle. (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2123809,00.html_I take tax deductions for home ownership and, formerly, my home office. (don’t know if Mitt can deduct mortgage interest … he may own his homes outright). I like clean water (subsidized), I like electricity when and where I want it (subsidized). I use / take advantage of many of the subsidies identified in that Time article.One reason why so many don’t pay taxes is because there IS a minimum income to pay taxes, and many in America don’t reach that. I don’t think minimum wage qualifies for Federal income tax, or at least not much. My daughter worked as much as she could a few years back as a waitress. Since her hours weren’t regular, not sure she got in “full time” hours. But she didn’t pay the Feds. She did pay other payroll taxes. 

  • gonkers

     
    I love On Point, but sadly, OP often reflects the decline in American journalism. Being fair and objective does NOT mean it must have on as guests political propagandists like Steven Moore. There are fair minded and thoughtful conservatives out there.

    Find them, damn it!

    • J__o__h__n

      In this instance there might have been slim pickings as even David Brooks wasn’t defending Mitt. 

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      Such conservatives have been beaten to a proverbial bloody pulp in a locked supply closet, and all the wingnuts have come out wearing the official uniforms of the GOP. (h/t Every spy movie, where the hero has to infiltrate a building, ever made.)

      As a lefty and an armchair media critic, it’s not a “me” problem (for journalists, left-wingers, any Beltway media program), it’s a “them” (Teaparty, GOP, right-wing propaganda press) problem.

      When the normies get back in charge of that party, then the guest list will likely change. But in the meantime, I don’t consider it OP’s job to pretend the crazies driving the bus aren’t in charge.

    • LiberalSkeptic

      But ARE there fair-minded, intelligent Republicans out there? If there are, I’ve never met one, and I’ve met a ton of Republicans in my day. Romney surely is not one of those intelligent conservatives that are supposedly out there. To say that we poor people feel entitled to food? What, rich white guys don’t feel entitled to food? Hello! I bet Romney would be the 1st to complain if he actually knew what going to bed without dinner was like, or if he were forced to make rice w/ corn & butter because it’s cheap. Are rich Republicans not eating food? Are they swallowing pills for lunch like they did in “The Jetsons?” Are they not human? Do they not need food to survive like us poor liberals? What a complete moron. I bet he doesn’t know what a $1 bill looks like. If he’s elected President, I’d say the stupid Republicans who voted for him deserve him. You vote for a idiot then you deserve an idiot to represent you. Republicans should be scratching their heads…Is Romney the best they can do? Even I can easily beat him in a debate, and that’s pretty bad.

      • TomK_in_Boston

        There were once. Maybe scott brown. Maybe there should be a nature preserve for them, like other endangered species. 

        The player closest to what I considered “fair-minded, intelligent Republicans” when I was growing up is President Obama.

      • hennorama

        Not only is Mr. Romney ” not one of those intelligent conservatives…” he’s not a”true Conservative”, as they define themselves.

        • TomK_in_Boston

          LOL, romney a “conservative”. As the joke goes: “A liberal and a conservative walk into a bar. The bartender says, “Hi, Mitt”"

          The one thing we know for sure, where the Etchasketch has never been shaken, is that he stands for the redistribution of more wealth and income to people like himself. He’s rock sold on that.

      • LiberalSkeptic

         @hennorama:disqus , that’s an excellent point, and probably the only good one that can solidly refute my statement. I know of a conservative, admittedly, who actually thinks about what he says. Forgot his name, but he’s nationally known…Will? Bill? smg like that. He’s a journalist. My father-in-law pointed him out to me. Oh, my father-in-law is quite conservative, but I seriously doubt he’d say idiotic things like Romney. @TomK_in_Boston:disqus , yes, we SHOULD have a nature preserve for them, ’cause they’re an endangered species. Interesting you’re in Boston, ’cause I am too…

        • hennorama

          You’re likely thinking of George Will.

          • LiberalSkeptic

             Yes! That’s the guy! I actually read a few of his articles and was impressed by the guy. Didn’t agree w/ everything, but at least he backed up what he said with sound logic.

  • StilllHere

    President B.H.O.
    has recently appointed a Golf Czar.                                                                                               
    Major rule changes in the game of golf will become effective September 1, 2012.                                                                    

    This is only a preview as the complete rule book (expect 2,700 pages) is being rewritten as we
    speak.  Here are a few of the
    changes:              
                                                                                              Golfers with handicaps:                                                                                      

      – Below 10 will
    have their green fees increased by 35%.                                                                                  
      – Between 11 and
    18 will see no increase in green fees.                                                                                

      – Above 18 will
    get a $20 check each time they play. 
    (Can’t wait to see my $$$$ check)                                                            

    The term
    “gimmie” will be changed to “entitlement” and will be used
    as follows:                                                              
          
      – Handicaps below
    10, no entitlements.                                                                                                             
      – Handicaps from
    11 to 17, entitlements for putter length putts.                                                                                    
      – Handicaps above
    18, if your ball is on green, no need to putt, just pick it up.                                                                                             
      These
    entitlements are intended to bring about fairness and, most importantly,
    equality in scoring.                                                

      In addition, a
    Player will be limited to a maximum of one birdie or six pars in any given
    18-hole round.                                           

      Any excess must
    be given to those fellow players who have not yet scored a birdie or par.                                                           

      Only after all
    players have received a birdie or par from the player actually making the
    birdie or par, can that player begin to count his pars and birdies again.                                               
      The current USGA
    handicap system will be used for the above purposes, but the term “net score” will be available only for scoring those players with handicaps of 18 and above.                                                                                                                                                                           
    This is intended to “re-distribute” the success of winning by making sure that in all competitions every Player above an 18 handicap will post only “net score” against every other player’s “gross score”.                                                                                             
    These new Rules are intended to CHANGE the game of golf.
    Golf must be about Fairness.  It should have nothing to do with ability, hard work, practice, and responsibility.
    This is the “Right Thing To Do.”                                                                                  
    So, please remember; if you shot a round of golf under par, you didn’t shoot it yourself.  Someone else built that
    course, and someone else cut the grass so that you could play on it.  Someone else built the clubs and the cart.                                                                    
    You need to share with everyone who made you a successful golfer.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      Not that you’re not capable of lameass crap like this on your own, but try removing the extra carriage returns when you post someone else’s rip-n-read spew next time.

      • J__o__h__n

        Are you claiming he didn’t build that?

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

          Heeheehee.

      • StilllHere

        So much like you to avoid the substance …

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

          Wow, looks like you typed that all yourself.

    • sickofthechit

       Edit please, quit wasting valuable space.

      • StilllHere

        Hold yourself to the same standard, we won’t see you again.

    • jimino

      You fool.  The game of golf already has a handicap system built into the rules.  The worst golfer can compete against the best under long-existing rules even if their respective gross scores are widely different.  People who are low-skilled and unsuccessful at mastering the game, even those who just don’t care about getting better, are given strokes, at no charge whatsoever, to help make up the difference.

      Commenting about something you know nothing about has never stopped you before, but unless you’re like Stephen Moore and don’t mind  repeatedly and publicly making a fool of yourself like him, I suggest being more selective about re-posting what you consider cute ideas.

    • jpolock

      Excellent Country Club Analysis, much like Romney’s worldview…

      Because human-being life is just like a rich man’s game.
      (of course when a poor person plays, it is sloth, when a rich man does it is “leisure”  And that’s because the rich man plays on Nantucket with brand new clubs and The poor guy plays at Roxbury Community without a full set…yeah EXACTLY the same) 

  • 65noname

    As usual, the guy chosen by government radio to be the progressive voice was instead a mushmouth.  He insisted on spending his time complaining that rommney was being mean to people instead of refuting the nonsense being spouted by the right winger.

    First, of course, most of the”47%” are working; its just that their jobs don’t pay enough to support a family.  Second, the clinton plan to end welfare did not put people to work.  all the studies done demonstrate that “ending welfare as we know it” did not end up increasing the amount of low-income people with jobs and did not improve their economic status (See, Edleman, Peter). Nor are public benefits the reason why people do not work. They don’t work because there are no jobs. And, does he beleive that seniors both haven’t paid for their social security and medicare and should be forced to work?  Corn did not bother to challenge any of these obvious untruths.

    • gonkers

      You make it sound as if there was a finite number of people on welfare back in 95 and if there are still some now, then welfare reform didn’t work. You don’t think there are new people coming into the system, especially while the nation is in a sluggish recovery?  

      • 65noname

        dude,
        the promise by clinton and his ilk was that ending welfare would raise the families on welfare out of poverty.  The facts show that since the end of welfarre, those families have sunk DEEPER into poverty rather than being raised out of poverty.

  • Gregg Smith

    In 1970 only 12% didn’t pay income tax. What was the tax rate?

    • MrNutso

      In 1970, tax rates ranged from 14% for income under 1,000 to 71.75% for income over 200,000.

      • Gregg Smith

        Thanks.

    • jpolock

      One could also live on one 40hr week job, unions were stronger, and you could buy a house for 15k and a new dodge for $500…

      CEO pay was a much smaller ratio vis a vis the average worker, and financialization was less than 20% of the economy….

  • Bruce94

    As the “Gipper” once observed, “there he goes again” — Mitt the poster boy for entrenched power and wealth indicting 47% of the population as dependent moochers as if reciting lines from an Ayn Rand novel.
     
    Ironically, this latest gaffe from a tin-eared, silver-spooned child of privilege who risked nothing with his former bosses’ job guarantee and his family’s fortune to fall back on in the event his gig as a leveraged buy-out artist at Bain didn’t work out.

    Catalog this remark along with enumerable other insights into this political chameleon’s vacuous mindset like the following gems with the inference in brackets:

    –”Let Detroit’s auto industry go bankrupt” [and let’s have an outsourcing orgy]–

    “Corporations are people, my friend” [especially people who befriend me with 75% of their anonymous donations going to my campaign]

    –”We talk about income inequality and tax policy only in quiet rooms” [with good reason…if the people understood my intention to redistribute income from the bottom to the top, they would reject my candidacy]

    –”I don’t care about or focus on the very poor” [or the working middle-class either]

  • ttajtt

    Without Government “IN” control of/for our retirement, medical aid, heat, water, food, shelter of caring years.  it will be STARTED AND FINISHED IN THE NAME OF THEIR PROFT MARGIN! thats what, why they do it for. called Taxes for all or Raise Your RATES for me/ myself/I.

  • hennorama

    Prediction #2:  Fox News will not cover this topic, and will instead show every available video that contains fire and protestors

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Too late.  They already have.

      • hennorama

        I stand corrected.

        They will run video of fire and protestors, run the Romney “the 47%” video, try to spin it as “inartful and inelegant”, try to spin it as “a media narrative” from “the MSM,” run “why wasn’t there enough embassy security” stuff, run more fire and protestors, spin “the 47%” again, and repeat.

        I give them credit for running “the 47%” stuff, and TRYING to defend it.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          It isn’t hard to defend the truth — there is too much government depedence and it is unstustanable.  Most people understand this.

    • OnPointComments

      Prediction:  MSNBC will cover this topic ad nauseum, and will cease all coverage of the diplomat murders, embassy attacks, and the administration’s excuse that an Internet video caused simultaneous spontaneous assaults that have nothing to do with the U.S. or its policies.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Don’t worry the administration took in the 14 minute video maker that no one watched in for questioning.  The protests should stop any minute now.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      Eh, when “Fox News covers a topic” they don’t seem to do it in any way resembling journalism.

      They are in full turd-polishing mode on this.

    • JGC

      They are trying to refocus us on the war in Afghanistan, but unfortunately Mitt Romney needs to be educated about this issue first. 

    • JGC

      I am listening to Limbaugh right now and he is trying to convince me that Obama is the one in trouble, not Romney. And that we should seize this truth blast as the opportunity it is. 

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Rush is correct.

        • gonkers

          Limbaugh is nothing but a right wing spinster.

          If Romney were not in deep trouble, Glenn Beck would not be in such hysterics today that the nation was doomed.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             I haven’t heard Beck in a while but when isn’t he in hysterics?

          • Mike_Card

            I’m close to agreeing, but Limbaugh is a fly speck; a lard-assed druggie in the entertainment biz who has no political cred beyond the lunatic wingnuts.

        • gonkers

          At InTrade Romney continues his downward slide from Sept 10th from about 42% chance of winning to now about 32%

          Let me guess… it’s a cynical attempt to supress the GOP vote, right?

          https://data.intrade.com/graphing/jsp/closingPricesForm.jsp?contractId=743475&tradeURL=https://www.intrade.com

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             LOL

            Let’s count the intrade votes on November 6th.

            Despite all the media spin that the race is now over after the conventions gallup (O +1) and rasmussen (R+2) has the race exactly the same as it was before the conventions.

            Ooops.  The media’s head is about to explode.  Damn it, we told the voters that the race is over.  Why aren’t they listening?

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Also intrade had Romney losing to Santorum 2:1 too.  How did that work out for Santorum?  About the same this is going to work out for Obama.

          • gonkers

            Who knows what would have happened in the GOP primaries if the Iowa straw polls didn’t give the win to Romney when he actually lost? The media advantage he received from that “mistake” was immeasurable.
             

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             LOL.  That’s the best one I’ve heard. 

            They flip 30 votes in a tiny state and that will flip the election?

            How about the counties that the Iowa GOP blocked a recount because they were Romney counties and would have likely given Romney a larger margin?

            The media was more than happy to give Santorum as much face time as he wanted.  Why?  Because Romney was the only candidate Obama and Axelrod feared.  They started attacking Romney in April 2011 and it’s been non-stop.

            Also, the media believes Santorum extreme social views tarnishes the GOP brand.  So for them,  the more, the better.

          • hennorama

            Further evidence that “let the market decide” doesn’t always work out.

        • Steve__T

           ROTFLMAO

      • LiberalSkeptic

         Limbaugh is literally a nut case, and I’m surprised anyone listens to his show. He should be as ignored as I am when I apply for jobs!

  • http://www.facebook.com/ubertook Ben Atkinson

    I am one of that 47%. It must be because I
    have no ambition and want to mooch off the government, and is not at all
    because I have a child to care for while my wife finishes her graduate
    degrees. Hopefully within a few years we will be able to contribute, and contribute to a greater degree than if we were denied this opportunity to further our education.On an unrelated note, I would really like to listen to a show on the 2012 Farm Bill, particularly the changes to the direct payment system the Democrats are pushing and how it could change (if at all) food production in this country.

  • hennorama

    Looking forward to the entertainment value of various Romney supporters and ol’ Willard himself trying to spin this poo.

    “Psst … seniors on Soc. Sec. who don’t pay FIT … I didn’t mean YOU”

    “Psst … military servicemembers fighting in Afghanistan … I didn’t mean YOU”

    “Psst … Latinos … I wasn’t demeaning your heritage …”

    “Psst … middle income parents with kids in college … I didn’t mean YOU”

    “Psst … the rest of the list of people I denigrated and/or implied were moochers …I didn’t mean YOU”

    Lots of hot air to come.

    • TomK_in_Boston

      I’d like to hear more about how he’s a self-made man who “inherited nothing”. Amazing how having a CEO governor daddy and an elite privileged upbringing had nothing to do with his success :)

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Tom, nothing on the rising gas and food prices and it’s effect on the 47%, or even the 100%?
     

    • gonkers

      Obama’s done little to rid the commodity markets of parasitic speculators. He may have signed Dodd-Frank but the rules for speculators are now a year and a half behind in being finalized.

      But then it was a right wing idea to let speculators run wild in these markets. So you actually believe Romney, who’s even against the meager Wall Street reforms in Dodd-Frank, is going to help you in this area? ROTF

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         It will take years to fully understand the damage Dodd-Frank has done.  2800 pages of regulations and thousands of ancillary regulations and rules. And this doesn’t account for the thousands of pages of ancillary rules and regulations that DF continues to spawn.

        Whey didn’t they start by restoring the 1933 Glass-Steagall act.  It was simple and only 30 pages long.

        • gonkers

          So you’re now FOR more stringent regulation of Wall St?

          • Steve__T

             Not on your life

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         There are speculators on both sides of a trade.  The proper regulation is tightening of margin requirements to control speculation.  Simple and effective because they now have to risk more of their own money.

        • gonkers

           So you’re admitting when in 2004 the Bush’s SEC changed the net capital requirements on big banks so they could go from leveraging 15:1 to about 40:1, it encouraged risky behavior? But that played no role in the economic collapse. It must be Carter’s fault! No, poor minorities that lied to get loans. No, CLINTON!!

        • gonkers

          So your claiming that speculators only make money off each other and NEVER affect the price that’s eventually passed down to consumers? ROTF

  • gonkers

    Do I see myself as a “victim” of insane GOP fiscal policy that created so much debt and helped crash the economy?

    Do I see myself as a “victim” of sociopathic predators on Wall Street who finally destroyed the economy?

    Do I see myself as a “victim” of speculators are allowed to run wild  in the commodity markets and are costing me $4 a gallon for gas? 

    I certainly do!

    But that makes me one of the 99% not the 47%. I’m no fan of Obama, but Romney will only make that worst.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       How did GOP debt ‘crash’ the economy?

      Please explain.

      Who signed the repeal of the 1933 Glass-Steagall act which created ‘too big to fail’ banks?  Hint:  it was done in 1999 by Bill Clinton.

      $4 gas is the direct result of insane domestic production policies AND Federal reserve actions to weaken the dollar because or horrible federal government policies resulting in a weak economy.  If there was some leadership in DC then Uncle Ben wouldn’t need a QE1, QE2, or QE3 which is driving up gasoline and commodity prices.

      Talk about a tax on the middle class.

      • gonkers

        Sorry, sloppy writing on my part. It should read:

        Do I see myself as a “victim” of insane GOP fiscal policy that created so much debt and reckless deregulation that helped crash the economy?

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           So you must be upset with the Obama debt which will add up to $6T (without a budget to reign in wasteful and unnecessary spending)..

          OK, please explain the reckless deregulation  put forward by the GOP AND helped crash the economy?

          The truth is there is none.  As pointed out previously GS repeal was signed by Clinton and that is the biggy.

          The CRA created the environment for liar loans.  This was promoted by the democrats.  I will concede Bush was all in on expanding the housing market — circa 2004 during his reelection cycle.  However, he did attempt to control over loaning by FANNIE and FREDDIE but was blocked by Barney Frank and the dems after they took control of congress in 2006.

          I’m willing to hear specific deregulations that the GOP passed but I’ve seen no evidence other than political talking points.

          • gonkers

            Ya ya, the CRA is to blame even if there was NO crash for THIRTY YEARS after it passed. THAT to you is sufficient to place the blame on the CRA?   

            Yup, NOTHING happened in the intervening 30 years. And it’s not as if the housing market went bust in 2001 when Bush took office. It went bust SEVEN YEARS into his presidency. You don’t think perhaps he might be a teeny-weeny bit to blame? No, of course not.

            Perhaps it’s time to get off your partisan high horse and take some lessons in critical thinking.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Personal attacks will get you nowhere.

            Read this and get back to me on that critical thinking thing:

            http://articles.businessinsider.com/2009-06-27/wall_street/30009234_1_mortgage-standards-lending-standards-mortgage-rates

      • gonkers

        Repealing Glass-Steagal was a GOP idea, one of several Clinton foolishly bought into.

        So because Clinton was a fool, that magically absolves the GOP from all blame in crashing the economy when they STILL support such reckless deregulation?

        At least Clinton had the sense to realize he made a mistake. I don’t see any second thoughts from the GOP. They created scapegoats so they wouldn’t have to look in the mirror.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          Why didn’t Obama restore Glass-Steagall instead of the disastrous Dodd-Frank over regulation?

          Clinton admits he made a mistake on Glass-Steagall? Never heard that.

  • JGC

    The Revenge of Jimmy Carter! Mmwah ha ha ha ha! (squint eyes, rub hands together fiendishly)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LTAJN7BFS2JZN3O2425TK4T3OU rogier

    What’s with this ‘paying people not to work’ – rhetoric? Food stamps are given to people so they don’t freakin die of hunger. Let anyone who says this spend 3 months on welfare. You can barely survive on it. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    Our life of poverty is as necessary as the work itself. Only in heaven will we see how much we owe to the poor for helping us to love God better because of them.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

      sorry that’s my gf’s eyes staring at you.

    • LiberalSkeptic

      Economic theory actually requires people living in poverty for a true capitalist system. As they say, some make it, some don’t. Poverty is EXPECTED by economic theory. After all, 5% unemployment is “normal.”

      • Mike_Card

        I can only think of Lake Wobegone.

  • TomK_in_Boston

    Can romney withdraw and let the GoP have another candidate? Has that ever happened in our history?

    • DrewInGeorgia

      AC wrote “i’m assuming repub’s are stuck w this one……or, can they still write someone in?”

      I replied “Same answer as last time question was posed: No way in hell the Cash Cow is getting traded in at this point. And what would they trade for? Trading a Gremlin for a Pinto is not trading up.”

      And I don’t care what circumstances would seem to dictate, this Sociopath will not withdraw no matter the consequences.

      • TomK_in_Boston

        Maybe he could claim that there was a family emergency and he had to go to switzerland to be with his money?

      • Steve__T

         Too much money (be)holding him in place.

    • Brandstad

      Why would the Republicans want to replace a centrist Republican candidate with a more Liberal Republican to run against a socialist Democrat?  That wouldn’t give voters much of a choice, but I suppose that is truly why you want him replaced anyway!

      • LiberalSkeptic

         Romney is a centrist? Am I dreaming? Did someone actually say Romney is a centrist? This is the same guy who seems to regret his Massachusetts health care bill…Can’t wait for Obama to mention this in the debates…

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           I thought he was the MA moderate.  Isn’t that what we heard from Santorum and Newt every day for 6 months?

          • TomK_in_Boston

            On what day?

    • Mike_Card

      Do not know the answer to your 2nd question, but get the impression that New Hampshire would insist on something…

  • http://www.facebook.com/ann.m.joyce.9 Ann Marie Joyce

    Tom–Don’t succumb–conservatives are doing such a good job of casting any questioning of their data as negative reporting that NPR seems to be falling down on their job.  Stephen Moore threw out  more inaccurate statement as “facts”  in his 3 minute tirade  this morning and not a murmur from you?  Expect more from you — I know NPR is tripping over itself to come across as “balanced” but when Moore or Ryan or anyone else that NPR is interviewing or giving air time to states something that has been judged inaccurate by all objective observers, they need to be called on it.  That’s good journalism.

    Ann Marie Joyce

    • LiberalSkeptic

       Yeah. In fact, perhaps Ann Joyce would be willing to do a show.

    • Ron_in_Virginia

      Ann makes a good point.  When Tom questioned Mr. Moore about the Republicans in Congress blocking the jobs bills that Pres. Obama offered over a year ago, Mr. Moore shifted to a complaint about the stimulus bill in 2009.  More bait and switch tactics by a WSJ partisan.  I’m sorry Tom let that slip by, but I guess he tried initially.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Well, that is what a “shootstorm” is: Fling enough feces and some will get on everyone.

        At some point, public radio doesn’t want to spend all its time having a host correcting its right-wing guest. It’s not built into the politeness of public radio.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    Happy Anniversary 99%!!! The struggle continues and the oppression remains for the American middle class.

    • Brandstad

      Don’t you mean the 47% 

      That is who you truely represent. 

      I hope you tell your kids to do well, but not too well because you don’t want them to be so successfull that they someday enter the top 5% of society!

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

        47% are successful they just need a little help.
        if you pay for the war to kill innocent Iraqi Children I think you will be able to help your own people in America.

        • LiberalSkeptic

           Well said. This country has paid out hundreds of billions of weapons that kill, and yet conservatives question the validity of helping someone get a job through government support and helping them live a decent life.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      You mean everyone other than the 1% in the OWS?

  • jefe68

    The irony here on where most of the people Romney is talking about live are in Red States. Well I’m all for the Blue states paying less in this regard.

    Alabama

    Arkansas

    Florida

    Georgia

    Idaho

    Louisiana

    Mississippi

    New Mexico

    South Carolina

    Texas
     

    • Mike_Card

      Not to quibble, but there seems to be a fair amount of speculation that New Mexico is blue this year.

      • jefe68

         True, and I think Florida is in play as well.
        I bet after this gaff Romney’s lost more of the senior vote.

    • Mouse_2012

      Didn’t see your post.

      I posted the same thing.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    Let us not seek the Republican answer or the Democratic answer, but the right answer. Let us not seek to fix the blame for the past. Let us accept our own responsibility for the future.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    This can be a winner for Romney.

    Most American’s don’t want government dependency.

    Romney just needs to clearly explain how his policies and plans for economic growth will expand the middle class and reduce the need for dependency.

    • hennorama

      You may be right.  He will no doubt try to spin his not “elegantly stated” and “spoken off the cuff” words this way.

      One small problem with your premise – Mr. Romney has not and will not disclose the detailed numbers he says will result from his proposals, so no one can analyze the accuracy of his claims.

      He also demonstrates repeatedly that he himself does not understand some very basic concepts.  For example, his words demonstrate that he equates “the 47%” who pay no FIT with the 47/48/49% of voters who currently support Pres. Obama, as if none of “the 47%” will vote for Romney, and all of “the 47%” will vote for Pres. Obama.

      He does this sort of thing over and over, as shown on his Meet The Press interview, where he conflates “revenues coming into the government” with “tax burden,” and gets into logically inconsistent gobbledygook.

      Not exactly “… clearly explain(ing) how his policies and plans for economic growth will expand the middle class and reduce the need for dependency.”

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        We can all do better :)

        Does anyone buy the line:  “return to the exact same policies that drove the economy into the ditch”?

        That is Obama’s primary argument for re-election: Don’t look at the guy who has been behind the curtain for the last four years but be very afraid of the new guy.

    • LiberalSkeptic

       Sadly, I agree. I’ll vote for Obama, for the record. But if Romney wants to get out of this mess, he should do what Donald Trump advised: don’t take back what he said, DON’T apologize. Instead, clarify and explain. And as I tell my students, GIVE EXAMPLES and use LOGICAL REASONING. Thankfully, Romney isn’t intelligent enough to do that.

      I certainly don’t want to depend on my government. In fact, I make less cash, individually speaking, than someone I know who IS receiving disability checks. The guy told me, “I can’t afford to work, literally.” That’s because getting a decent job is harder than those fat, rich, white Republicans realize (the ones who sit on their asses and yet somehow make $20 million from stock dividends).

      I REFUSE to accept government handouts like that though. I probably could…well, maybe not, but I could at least try & fill out an application. BUT I DON’T. Because I believe in working hard.

      And Romney is right about one thing: There’s nothing he can do to convince that 47% to vote for him. He really DOESN’T care about us. His “target market,” to put it in business terms, are those who somehow haven’t made a decision yet, which is about 5-10% of registered voters who are likely to vote (recall not all registered voters vote). This video could be a godsend for him if he admits his mistake and tells the truth. Shoot, maybe I should work for him and run his campaign. I wouldn’t vote for him, but I’d work for him if he gave me a job.

    • jefe68

      Doubt it, he’s not doing well in the polls and he wants to kick start his campaign again, and now this.

      You should change your moniker to Worried for Mitt…

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Not doing well in the polls?

        Today’s gallup is O +1; today’s Rasmusen R +2.

        Identical to the pre convention numbers.

        I guess Romney has to be, what, +10 in a +8D poll to be “doing well”, in your view.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

          Stop pretending that anyone should follow Rasmussen out of a burning buiding. It says more about you than the state of the electorate that you quote them.

        • hennorama

          National polls are irrelevant, as we elect a President on a state-by-state basis.  This Presidential election will come down to a small number of precincts, in an even smaller number of states.

    • Joseph_Wisconsin

       The problem is that a huge chuck of the 47% Romney is talking about are seniors living of of SS and receiving Medicare.  This group is also one of the few that are more likely to vote for Romney that for Obama.  Explaining to them that SS and Medicare is not something that they have earned by paying payroll taxes their entire lives, but is instead them “mooching” off of income tax paying wealthy might jeopardize those votes.  Not to mention that a higher percentage of “moochers” are in the South in states that Romney has locked up.  

      What plans does Romney have for economic growth that will help the middle class by the way?  Cutting taxes for the wealthy, another spate of deregulation of businesses, and telling everyone who has seen there well paying jobs in manufacturing disappear to just go take those low paying jobs that there are such an abundance of? Telling young people that want to attend college or start a business that they should just borrow the money needed from their parents (Unlike Romney who was just given it by his parents?) however out of touch that is for reality among more than the bottom 47%? The same policies practiced by GW Bush that saw a decade of decline in the Middle Class, and concentration of income and wealth to the top few percent like has not been seen for over 70 years?  

      http://graphics8.nytimes.com/news/business/0915taxesandeconomy.pdf

    • Steve__T

       Na Because his past actions speak louder than his current lies.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    Why is the message of the 99% is not clear? because it is not only a message. there are thousands of messages that needs to be cleared.

  • DrewInGeorgia

    Doesn’t Romney see himself as a victim? A victim of the greedy parasites that are restricting his earning potential? A victim of unfair tax rates that he has already rendered practically non-existent? A victim of pesky regulations that attempt to protect Human Life but hinder advancement of his agenda? A victim of encroachment by Faiths that are not his chosen one on the things he feels he is entitled to?

    Maybe I’m just reading it completely wrong. I doubt it.

    • Mike_Card

      Willare is a victim of those information-hungry parasites who absolutely refuse to be satisfied until his federal income tax returns provide a glimpse into his soul, even though “those people” already have more than enough.

    • jefe68

      Mitt Romney is a victim of facts, and he does not like it.
      The man is giving political comics a lot of material here.
      Even David Brooks is seeing the light…

      • hennorama

        Perhaps this is what Mr. Romney meant when talking about job creation – giving endless material to out-of-work comedians, cartoonists, joke writers and satarists.

    • hennorama

      Mr. Romney is a victim of his own words.  All of his wounds are self-inflicted.

      I would have said “his campaign has been shot in the heart” but realized that would be unlikely, due to the difficulty in locating said heart.

  • hennorama

    Romney and Ryan are supposed to be “numbers guys,” who understand finance and statistics and arithmetic, right?

    Mr. Romney’s words demonstrate that he does not understand some very basic ”numbers” stuff.  He indicates that “the 47%” who don’t pay Federal Income Taxes (FIT) are the same 47/48/49% of voters who support Pres. Obama.

    As if none of “the 47%” would vote for for Mr. Romney, and all of “the 47%” would vote for Pres. Obama.

    He was speaking in front of potential donors, presumably people with significant available funds, and smart enough to “know the numbers” well enough to get those funds.  If Romney can’t even demonstrate understanding of the simplest of concepts, why would they give him a dime of their money?

    • DrewInGeorgia

      Because he can’t understand even the simplest of concepts. What better material could a puppet be made of? You did catch the Plate cost didn’t you? An annual salary for what used to be a middle class family in exchange for some Happy Glad-Handing with your Pals. Disgusting.

      • OnPointComments

        “When President Obama addresses an elite roster of hipsters and multimillionaires, including hosts Beyoncé and Jay-Z, in New York tonight, he will do so next to a custom-designed tower of $800-per-bottle champagne that dominates the main room at Jay-Z’s 40/40 nightclub.    

        The 350-bottle champagne tower — designed by Jeffrey Beers — is a monument to Jay-Z’s favorite bubbly, Armand de Brignac, which is known colloquially by rappers, clubgoers and connoisseurs as Ace of Spades because of its gold-spade label.    

        “It’s floor-to-ceiling gold bottles in the entire space. It’s beautiful — breathtaking,” a rep for the Flatiron District hot spot told The Post. “It’s the first thing you see when you walk in.”     But the White House, which meticulously controls Obama’s image, is not expected to release any photos of the president’s appearance at the lavish club.”  –NY Post
         

        I await your outrage.

        • DrewInGeorgia

          Deflection. Pft.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

          Excuse me if you know the history of Jay-Z he came from the Gutter. just like the majority of BLACK ARTISTs OUT THERE. He work hard for his money I think he deserve to treat himself with a $800 champagne bottle and ask the President be his guess.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

      Robert Mcnamara was number guy or the whiz kid.
      Look what happened in the Vietnam war. 55,000 American soldiers died for what?

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Uh oh.

      FOIA emails expose coordination between the DOJ and Media Matters in an effort to spin the Fast and Furious scandal.

    Looks like Media matters may have  violated their tax exempt status.
     

    • OnPointComments

      It’s odd that the emails are redacted with FOIA notations, but apparently weren’t redacted between DOJ and Media Matters.

  • James Turner

    Anyone who believes in a just society must realize the only way to achieve true equality among the masses requires the abolition of private property.  State ownership and distribution of necessities (food; housing; utilities; etc.) as well as the provision of free medical care, education, and a guaranteed job for the entire populace is the only manner to achieve true parity in our country.  Millionaires (be they right-wing capitalists or left-wing Hollywood elites) must become a thing of the past and their excess wealth expropriated to achieve the greatest good for all.

    If one can set aside human rights issues, countries such as Cuba and the former Soviet Union/Eastern Bloc achieved great equality among their citizens by managing the distribution of necessities for daily life.  Unfortunately their citizens have increasingly fallen victim to capitalist greed and its subsequent class dissent.

    • OnPointComments

      “True Socialism, in which everyone is truly equal, does not just resemble a prison – it is a prison. It can not exist unless it is surrounded by high walls, by watchtowers and by guard-dogs, for people always want to escape from any socialist regime, just as they do from a prison. If you continue your attempts to establish a model society you will need to build walls around it.”  –Viktor Suvorov, Russian writer

    • Christopher Penny

      History has showed us that a well regulated capitalist system provides the highest standard of living to the most people. This is what we have been developing since FDR, and its what we should continue to develop.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/7PCBO7MOTRVVFJZC4AAAQAKOOU Denise

    I loved how after all that contemptuous spin about how lazy poor people refuse to take all those non-existent jobs the conservative guest (Stephen Moore) couldn’t get off the air fast enough and slammed down his phone without saying goodbye or thank you. So classy!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1098201408 Michelle Turner

    Help!  The right wing guest has clearly lost his mind, and has no heart.  Thanks for the great talk!!
    Obama is trying to end Military homelessness this alone is going to put more folks on welfare, but it’s a good help you up kind of welfare.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

      If I win 20 million from the lottery. 1/2 of my winnings will be donated to poverty. If I die I will give all my fortune to humanity.

  • Elizabeth_BO

    We are all dependent on gov’t!  How can someone take this statement and Romney’s argument seriously?
    Isn’t Romney and his followers dependent on gov’t?  Do they live in caves and in the woods not having infrastructure, fire service, police, etc?

    • Michele

       Nevermind the fact that they are part of the government (or want to be again).  What a joke!

  • LiberalSkeptic

    My favorite comment Romney makes is that people sometimes vote on emotion, “whether they like the guy or not.” Reminds me of the Will Ferrell movie “Candidate,” when at the beginning Will’s character says, “I just say what people want to hear…but I don’t really believe it.”

  • JGC

    Wait a minute…622 comments already and it is only 2:15 p.m?Clearly, all you people are part of the mooching 47%  Now, go out there and get a job!

    • LiberalSkeptic

       Yes, I’m part of the 47%. I’d get a job if my resumes and job apps weren’t completely ignored, despite having TWO, yes TWO master’s degrees, one of them an MBA. Are YOU going to give me a decent job w/ a salary? I didn’t think so. Again, a conservative who can’t back up what he/she says…

      • DrewInGeorgia

        It was sarcasm…

        • LiberalSkeptic

           oops. didn’t read the sarcasm. sorry.

      • JGC

        Wait another minute, LiberalSkeptic! I don’t think you have seen many of my posts.  I am a card carrying Democrat voting for Obama!  I am sure WorriedfortheCountry and Gregg Smith will vouch for my bleeding heart status…  

      • William

         You are waiting for someone to “give you a decent job/w a salary” you a job? Perhaps that is your problem.

        • LiberalSkeptic

           hmm, good pt. Except I’ve sent hundreds of apps over the last 2 years. Got maybe 2 interviews…Perhaps I’m also looking in the wrong places.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        JGC is full-on deadpan here. I heard, in my head, his take with the voice of the late Jim Backus as Thurston Howell III.

    • Steve__T

       I went on an job Interview and came back because I couldn’t afford the gas to go shopping with my food stamps.

      • JGC

        I hope you are making an insightful point and this is not your reality…But if it is not yours, it probably is someone else’s.

  • jpolock

    Ah yes, Michael Moore’s TV Nation I believe?  On FOX no less!  Must’ve been prior to Murdoch….but then it was cancelled fairly soon :(

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      (Disqus has blurped again, but I’m figuring you’re responding about “Crackers”, from Michael Moore’s show. You hit the nail on the head.)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    925 million hungry people in 2010 and the numbers are up in 2012. Not because they are lazy. because of lack of jobs,food and shelter.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       So let’s vote for Romney so there will be more jobs to go around.

      • gonkers

        Romney is Bush Act 2.

        Why would it work any better this time?

        Let me guess… the crash was REALLY the fault of Carter, Clinton, and poor minorities lying to get loans.

        Am I close?  

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Romney is a vast improvement over Bush.

          However, now that you mention it Obama IS Carter’s lost second term.

        • Joseph_Wisconsin

          “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
          ” Albert Einstein

  • JGC

    From the Borowitz Report, concerning “rare video footage showing Mitt Romney saying what he really thinks”:

    In what his campaign described today as a bold strategy to insure victory in the Presidential contest, Republican nominee Mitt Romney will undergo a procedure to have his mouth wired shut until Tuesday, November 6th… In the video, Mr. Romney blasts the American people for being “insanely obsessed with food, clothing and shelter” and asserts that many of them are “too lazy to hide their money overseas”…Romney campaign aides were upbeat about the mouth wiring procedure today, with some saying they wished they had thought of it months ago… 

  • jpolock

    This was supposed to be a reply to a certain “Tony” way down in the comments, don’t know why it pooped up here…

    I sure am glad that you now fully embrace your rascism….as if racial dispairity (as much based on class) is not a factor, genius.  Next thing you’ll be spouting that “some people just can’t learn” too…

  • Pingback: Romney And The ‘Dependent’ 47 Percent | On Point | Clearing House for Environmental Course Material

  • jpolock

    This one also was meant as a reply, for “TF”

    sorry

  • hennorama

    Prediction #3: Romney campaign begins confiscating smart phones and other recording devices from fundraiser attendees

    • gonkers

      Next it will be pens. I’ve seen a video recorder built into a pen at Brookstone!

  • Kenneth Rubenstein

    I’m an Obama voter, not a victim, don’t want or need handouts, and find Romney’s states extremely offensive. I really wonder what else he’s said at private fundraisers. Is this the tip of an iceberg? Is he an American in the sense that I understand the term or is he a neo-plutocrat, period?

  • SuzyinPA

    Thank you, Stephen Moore, for your “take” on those of us who have the misfortune to be receiving unemployment compensation right now.  I am 60 years old, a college graduate, and I have been worked since I was 16.  I put two children through college by working 2 jobs.  I lost my job 9 months ago because of downsizing, but I have excellent skills, great references, and a strong work-ethic.  I apply for approximately 15 jobs per week, have expanded my search-area to a 100 mile radius of my home, and continue to network with others in my profession.  Your comment that unemployed individuals only begin to look for work when they run out of benefits is FAR off the mark.  And the idea that I (and the majority of my peers) would rather be sitting at home than be a productive member of society is a falsehood that only a ”one-percenter” would spew. 

    I never wanted to “be on the dole” – but I am extremely grateful that the safety net exists.  And I will be happy to help those less fortunate than myself, once I am again a contributing member of society.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

      Just like the people of Rhode Island. They travel 100, 150 to 200 miles to go work and get paid less but still continue to drive that long winding road in order to feed their empty stomach.

  • Mouse_2012

    In fact, while Romney seemed to say that the president will draw most of his support from those who pay no income taxes, a Tax Foundation map highlighting the 10 states with the highest percentages of “non-payers” shows most are Republican territories

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/09/18/161333783/romneys-wrong-and-right-about-the-47-percent

    http://taxfoundation.org:81/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/UserFiles/Image/Fiscal%20Facts/20100524-229-nonpayers-map-.jpg

    — Alabama
    — Arkansas
    — Florida
    — Georgia
    — Idaho
    — Louisiana
    — Mississippi
    — New Mexico
    — South Carolina
    — Texas

  • Tishen

    I keep hearing about the insult to the 47%, when in fact Romney insulted many of the 5% that he’d like to win over to his side.

    In that 5% there are voters who in the past have been swayed to fiscally conservative positions that have more recently relied on government services (like unemployment) in these past few years.

    This shows how out of touch the man is with who it is that uses these government run services. I am sure he lost some votes today.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    An imbalance between rich and poor is the oldest and most fatal ailment of all republics.

  • fishey22

    How can you discuss the the fact that 47% of our population doesn’t pay income tax (largely due to LOW incomes without discussing the fact that over the past 35 to 40 years 95% of Americans have experienced flat or declining income levels while the top 5% have experienced %300 increases in after tax income?  The figures regarding income are available from the Center for Disease control web site. 

    After over 30 years of trickle down, conservative economic policy, we have an imploding middle class.  These economic policies don’t work.  They have proven to be wrong.  Arguing for MORE of the same is crazy.  Conservative economic policies have created an economy where half of us can’t live without government aid because no matter how hard people work, they can’t get ahead.  The rewards of increased productivity go to the top 5%. 

  • wander24

    There is a difference between NEED and WANT.  Of the 47% Romney refers most NEED the help.  The worst economy since the great depression, outsourcing jobs, certainly are reason for the increase in food stamps/LINK cards.  There are problems within the welfare system; however, stereotyping all recipients as being unwilling to work is an over generalization, and just plain ignorant and lacks compassion.

    • kams1

      I don’t disagree about “need” and it’s unfortunate. I do disagree about what each candidate is going to do to alleviate that need. President Obama has a 4 year track record of expanding need. Mr. Romney didn’t misspeak…he said it straight up and his statistics are accurate. The difference is he has a proven track record of creating wealth, creating jobs and building a strong economy. That is ultimately what will win my vote: Results – not Obama’s 4 years of rhetoric *without* results. 

    • hennorama

      Um, sorry, but do you believe that ALL of “the 47%” Mr. Romney so eloquently refers to, not only don’t pay FIT (Fed. Inc. tax), but also receive some form of “food stamps/LINK cards” and/or “welfare” and they “NEED the help”?

      This is absolutely untrue.

      I’m sure someone has analyzed the data as to who among  ”the 47%” receive some Federal support, but it is certainly not 100%, nor anywhere NEAR 100%. 

      You are conflating individuals who are receiving some sort of Federal support, such as housing assistance, nutrition assistance, cash support, etc., with individuals who pay no FIT.  These groups are neither mutually inclusive nor are they mutually exclusive.

      In other words, SOME people who pay no FIT receive some Federal support (as described above), but not nearly all of them do.  Conversely, SOME people who receive Fed. support pay FIT.

      A quick data point as an example: the fastest-growing group who pay no FIT have incomes in the $75,000 to $100,000 range.

      Information has power; get more and be more powerful.

  • StilllHere

    What we can conclude is that Republicans believe in a world where success is based on effort/value and safety nets should be temporary except in rare circumstances.  Democrats hate success and believe that all should be dragged down to the lowest common denominator with the state as the caregiver.

    • Mouse_2012

      Inductive fallacies‎

      • jimino

        Way too obtuse.  How about “don’t you ever tire of being wrong about every single thing about which you comment?”

        Too bad there’s not an intellect or logic handicap system like in the game of golf.  It would at least allow you to be somewhat competitive in a discussion.

  • Gregg Smith

    I refuse to accept the idea that 47% of the country are not capable of achieving a modicum of success in life. Also lost is the reason why so many are not paying, that reason is Bush’s expansion of the EIC. They not only don’t pay income tax they receive tax credits. That’s redistribution of wealth straight up. 

    I fail to see the controversy in Romney’s statement.

    • Mouse_2012

      So your advocating for rasing taxes on 47% of americans? Which Republican is advocating raising taxes on 47% of American?

      • Gregg Smith

        I’m saying the 47% need to STFU and show some appreciation for those pulling the weight.

        • Mouse_2012

          So you don’t want the 47% to pay taxes but instead praise the 53%?

          • Gregg Smith

            That would be a good start especially the top 1%. They deserve a medal.

          • Mouse_2012

            Where should we send the medal to Soros? I mean he is part of the 1%.

          • Steve__T

             Do you get one?

        • Mouse_2012

          So States that get more from the government than pay in should STFU and show some aprrecitation to the states pulling the weight?

        • gonkers

          You mean our kids and grandkids from whom we’re stealing the money? You always pretend you are paying for everyone when those it’s our kids and grandkids who are paying for YOUR tax cuts… tax cuts were never could afford.

    • jimino

      Do you include the 19,000 household with income over $500,000 that didn’t pay income tax in 2011 in your category of those “not capable of achieving a modicum of success”?

      You actually, and I expect unintentionally, do hit the nail on the head by stating that our system is definitely one that results in “redistribution of wealth straight up.”  To the most wealthy, of course.  Hence the growing income and wealth gap.

      • Gregg Smith

        There is no way for wealth to be redistributed up.

        • J__o__h__n

          Middle class wages have been stagnant for decades.  The rich have gotten even richer.  Where did they get that?

          • Gregg Smith

            The poor wrote them checks.

          • Steve__T

             Exactly when they loss their jobs that were shipped over seas

          • Gregg Smith

            Huh?

          • Steve__T

             Lol I knew you wouldn’t get it.

      • William

        Where these 500k households receiving income via muni-bonds? or other non taxed investments? That is not illegal and is actually a good source of funding for the cities, schools etc…

    • hennorama

      I’m interested in how many are the “so many” you refer to.  Just curious.

      Also, an editing suggestion – you may wish to change “That’s redistribution of wealth straight up” to something like “That’s a clear redistribution of wealth.”  I’m certain your use of  ”straight up” meant “obviously” or “right there” or similar, and was not intended as a remark about the direction of the wealth distribution that you aver.

      • Gregg Smith

        I was referring to the 6 million of the poorest who saw their tax liability disappear with the Bush tax cuts.

        Thank you for the grammar tip, it went right over my head. It is kinda’ funny.

        I think the notion of redistributing wealth up comes from the idea government owns the money so if they allow the rich to keep more of what is theirs then it means they took it from the poor… or something. It makes no sense to me at all. Meanwhile the people actually write checks (real ones) to the government who send that money to those who don’t pay taxes. That’s easy to understand. It redistribution … plain and simple.

        • hennorama

          I haven’t looked at the cohort of those who no longer pay taxes subsequent to Bush II’s tax changes, but it’s highly unlikely that 100% (or anything close to 100%) of those no longer paying FIT came to this outcome as a result of expansion of the EITC.  That was my initial point, and why I made my rhetorical comment.

          I agree that it is inaccurate to characterize tax law changes to those in the upper income brackets as redistributing wealth “up.”

          And yes, your “straight up” comment cracked me up as well. You’re welcome as to the suggested change.

          • Gregg Smith

            I disagree, the vast majority of those who no longer had to pay income taxes were eligible for the EITC. That meant they got a check that was NOT a refund.

  • bfryer

    What keeps getting lost in all of this is that most of us, at one time or another, don’t pay federal taxes — either as students on one end of the age spectrum, or as recipients of social security on the other. Meanwhile, it’s pretty weird that Governor Robme would complain about people not paying taxes when he won’t show us his (because he is obviously hiding something damning), and when the tax rate we do know that he and his rich buddies pay is a fraction of the average. 

    • Mouse_2012

       even if someone got all the taxes paid out, they would still be at a loss since the government doesn’t provide Interest on such taxes held.

    • William

       Where are Obama’s educational records? What is he hiding? (Something very damning?)

      • JGC

        What do you think he is hiding?

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           What do you think he was hiding?

          Scholarship as a foreign student?  If that was true, how would the media treat it?  I wonder.

          • JGC

            Groan. You and Trump and my cousin Donna really have to let that Birther thing go…

          • donniethebrasco

             Obama’s college transcripts haven’t been released yet?

            Does he say he is Kenyan?  Did he get bad grades?  Did he take only gut courses?

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             The key question.

            Did he take Econ 101 and what was his grade?

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             It has nothing to do with birtherism.  However, it is similar to using the fake Indian thing to get ahead.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            “Transcripts” are the new polite thing birthers are asking for.

            And since you put twice as much effort into being polite as to being accurate…

          • J__o__h__n

            What is Romney hiding in his tax records?

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            That he really gave more to charity than people think and he’s too modest to let on.

        • William

           Why guess? Should Tom do a show on Obama’s past? Even Charlie Rose commented to David Brooks and Tom Brokaw “Who is Brarack Obama?”.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Ooh, looks like someone’s progressed from demanding a long-form birth certificate! Now we’re onto “transcripts”!

        One eentsy step forward at a time from Williamworld.

        • William

           Where are they? Have you seen them? Oh yes, can’t have that can we?….so many questions about Obama’s past and so few answers.

    • hennorama

      If you removed the portion of your post in parentheses, your point would be much stronger

  • JGC

    Mother Jones has posted the entire video on YouTube in two parts, each around 20 or 30 minutes in length.  One choice bit is located at about 6 minutes 30 on the second half of the video:

    Donor at the fundraiser:…I am optimistic that you will be elected President, and my recommendation would be clean house immediately, the SEC, the CFTC…

    Romney breaks in here:  I wish we weren’t unionized so we could go a lot deeper than you’re actually allowed to go…

    This is job creator Romney wistfully musing about cutting many more jobs.  Sounds like he has had a lot of practice going deep in the creative job destruction field.

    • donniethebrasco

       He would still have to hire replacements.  One bad actor can hurt the work of 10 good employees.

  • quiltgyr

    Republicans complain about people being on welfare and food stamps, but as President Clinton pointed out at the DNC, the Republican Congress has not created any jobs. They have purposely blocked President Obama’s job proposals, as bridges and roads crumble, while repeatedly voting to strip Americans of healthcare.

  • hennorama

    Oh man … now some Romney supporters are saying “Be BOLD Mitt!  Don’t apologize!  Own it!  Tell us more!”

    Yes, I can see the new BOLD Romney bumper stickers now “The 47% CAN KISS MY …”

    • Linda Wilson

       Or, to paraphrase the old Bush-Cheney bumper sticker:  “Romney-Ryan:  Putting the ‘con’ back in ‘conservative’”

  • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

    This is rich! Who’s not pulling one’s weight. Last I heard Mitt paid less than 15% on millions in income. While those of us who do pay income taxes in the 99% pay nearly twice that, strictly speaking. When all other taxes come into consideration… we pay far more percentage wise. And we’re at near historic lows as a percentage of GDP: thanks W!

    This is coming from a guy who won’t release his tax returns before 2010. Well what might have happened in 2009 that can’t be brought into the light of day? Perhaps is was because in 2009  the IRS offered amnesty for the wealthy who were hiding income in Swiss Bank accounts. Odd coincidence or evil liberal conspiracy? Such viscous rumors could be quickly put to rest by Mitt. Just sayin’ :^)

    • TomK_in_Boston

      It’s the “attack where you are weak” strategy. We are struggling to fund the USA because of, in  part, the ultra-low tax rates paid by oligarchs like etchasketch, so SOP is to complain about the poor who pay nothing because they have nothing. Disgusting and predictable.

      • hennorama

        And the hypocrisy of the fact that many of “the 47%” pay no FIT as a result of policies enacted by Mr. Romney’s “good friend” Bush II, which has been pointed out previously multiple times.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

     New Obama tape uncovered today where he states and makes the case:

    ‘I believe in redistribution’

    I guess we should expect Tom and OnPoint to juggle their schedule and spend their first hour picking apart this new Obama video.

    • Mouse_2012

      Stilll polishing that Romney Turd?

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Hmmm.  I didn’t mention Romney in my comment.  Do you work for the media or Axelrod?

        Oh that’s right, they are one in the same.

        • Mouse_2012

          Good one, not very funny but atleast you tried.

  • Michele

    Wait a minute, just because someone doesn’t pay income taxes on Soc. Security does not mean that they don’t have any taxable income.  The numbers that make up the 47% seem a bit suspect.  A tax deduction does not render one’s taxable income to zero, although it may bring it down below 11% (just ask Romney).

  • SpiritualLust

    mr. “I built myself the cabin that I was born in”, Governor Robme
    is hard to comprehend in that tape. Perhaps of all that silverwear that he has in his mouth. Or the wooden demeaner he has from absolute lack of compassion to his countryman. I am ,luckily, not in those 47%. But I gladly pay my share, because I know, that so many of the people WOULD LOVE to pay their FIT, if there were any decent jobs available.
    And Governor-problem-solver “I tied my dog to the roof of my car”, before you ask people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, look around first and see if people have boots…

  • Kenneth Rubenstein

    If Moore, Romney, Ryan, Thomas, and Scalia have their way, I might as well move to Mexico, because it couldn’t be any worse than their America.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Don’t forget the postcard from time to time.

    • Joseph_Wisconsin

       Or send Mitt back to the country he wishes he was from?

  • wanderwoods

    When I first heard this quote I was shocked: 47% of Americans don’t pay income tax? Then I realized I had been one of them from age 18 until 25–during college and just afterward. I worked as a summer-season National Park Service ranger and the rest of the year as a substitute teacher, and I made under $20,000 annually. Never did that time did I consider myself a “victim,” nor was I even eligible for any sort of government assistance as far as I knew.  It is absurd that Romney conflates these two ideas: not paying (income) taxes does not mean one is dependent upon any sort of government security net!
       More to the point, I am now a nurse and my husband is a teacher; we paid a total of 31% of our income last year in state, federal, and payroll taxes. And Mr. Romney paid 13%. So who’s “entitled” here?
    -Elissa Preston
    Davenport, California

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Sigh!  Remember he was talking to political donors about the political process of attracting voters.

      The point he was making in responding to a question was his income tax cut proposals might not resonate with the 47% who don’t currently pay income tax.

      That is an obvious and  valid point.

      However, what he didn’t say and what he should say is his pro-growth economic plans will be beneficial for everyone, including those not currently paying income tax, because it will create opportunities for everyone.

      • https://twitter.com/MerlinHenry Melin Henry Harper Jr

        Too late for the ‘in-artful’ apology. He did his Freudian and revealed his bias. Vote Green and Jill Stein!

      • jefe68

        Spin away. Your man’s toast unless something really awful happens Mitt Romney is a loser.

      • TinaWrites

        “Growth” really means increased dividends for stock holders.  It doesn’t mean more jobs for American workers.  ”Pro-growth” means we want to get rid of environmental and worker protection regulations.  So, the Romneys will make out very well, again, while inner city kids suffer Asthma in greater numbers and greater intensity, and water supplies thruout the areas with fracking activity are put in great jeopardy.  But Romney can’t care about any of those people, either!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TPVGHR7OPH47B7OHA5OOQJQ5PM HB

    Read more about more actions from Bain Capital.

    Then consider the word “dependent”…

    It is a chilling combination from one man.

  • Pingback: Tin Man of American Politics | The Balsamean™

  • Markus6

    I’d like to see Romney elected, but think it’s becoming less and less likely that anyone who threatens those who are dependent on government, will win. At some point, those who get money from the government (government workers, those on food stamps, medicaid recipients, welfare, even GM employees)  outnumber those who don’t. We may have to go through a Greece like period, before a serious dent can be made in the size of government. Of course, we won’t have the Germans to bail us out. 

    • Mouse_2012

      Both Romney and Paul Ryan get money from the government, this includes nearly all Think Tanks like AEI,Herritage, Consertive NGO’s and again Red States get more money from the government than Blue.

      • TinaWrites

        What’s the reasoning for giving these groups this money?  This is very interesting news.  Thanks!

    • jimino

       ”those who are dependent on government”

      You mean like the Republican Senate candidate in Nebraska who every year gets more in federal subsidies for her family’s business than a welfare mother gets 25 years?

      • TinaWrites

        And Congressmen and Senators, including Paul Ryan, get the very best health insurance plan, while most businessmen are cutting insurance coverage for workers and retirees.  The Republicans are such bold-faced hypocrits! 

    • Christopher Penny

      For about 30 years we had a strong safety net, a thriving economy, we were a major economic and military power, and we consistently held a healthy dept of around 20% of GDP. What changed? Reagan cut taxes without reducing spending. Our last two Republican presidents did the same thing. What makes you think Romney will be different?
      I am certainly open to spending reduction, but when I hear people talking about how high tax rates on the wealthy will kill our economy, I have to look back at our 30 year history when it did not.

    • jefe68

      You forgot the largest group of government workers, as did Mitt Romney during the GOP convention, the folks in the military.

      I’m sick and tired of hearing the same old and tired line about Greece. We are so far off from being anything like that country in all ways, and yet you regressive right wing fear mongers keep going on about this myth. I guess it’s the nature of thinking of Greece that leads to the mendacious to conjure up mythologies. 

  • Steve_the_Repoman

    Is the best America can do in politics…..

  • Mouse_2012

    ATC had on the author of “liberal fascism’ to give his supposed expert view of Romney comments. He was polishing that turd really good today in the softball interview on Romney.

    • Ray in VT

      Wow, they really hauled out the intellectual heavyweights today, huh?  I assume that you are referring to Jonah Goldberg.

      • Mouse_2012

        Yep, I like to point out the guy who wrote “liberal Fascism” is someone NPR would go to to get errrr…. “expert” POV.

        • Ray in VT

          Must be all of the real intellectuals in the conservative circles were otherwise occupied (possibly putting out fires on other media shows).

          My boss, a conservative who was a big fan of Barry Goldwater, refers to Mr. Goldberg as a “doughy pantywaste”.

  • Michele

    Mr. Moore is still promoting the misinformation from the RNC regarding welfare reform under the Obama administration and that they are trying to signup more people to welfare rolls. 

    From Bill Clinton’s speech at the DNC Convention:

    “When some Republican governors asked to try new
    ways to put people on welfare back to work, the Obama Administration
    said they would only do it if they had a credible plan to increase
    employment by 20%. You hear that? More work. So the claim that
    President Obama weakened welfare reform’s work requirement is just not
    true.”

  • JGC

    I wonder how the Romney fundraiser will go tonight.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/RBONPISV6DCCKAC5JIPSCOGILM Rom

    Jeez guys you’re in big trouble your campaign is starting to sound like a French presidential campaign, with all the bragging about the so-called assisted mentality of half of the people. Romney just sounds like Sarkozy a few years ago. One must believe that intelligence and original thinking are the most needed traits for conservatives all over the world.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/RBONPISV6DCCKAC5JIPSCOGILM Rom

     Dont worry, the fed will print more money and the Chinese will bail you. For now. Where do you think you leave, Disneyland?

  • libraryshortcake

    Infuriating! Having watched (and cried with) family members desperately looking for jobs unsuccessfully, in terrible FEAR of NOT finding a job fast enough- in FEAR having their unemployment payments end before finding even menial employment- in FEAR of ending up having to foreclose on their homes… this just exposes Romney’s utter lack of understanding of the middle class and the poor. Most find it humiliating to turn to social services for support. And I’m not talking about deadbeats, uneducated people, or anyone lacking skills or experience. Social services allowed my family to SURVIVE and kept them from being homeless before finding jobs- first in restaurants and construction, and finally in their fields.

    • hennorama

      Well said, and congrats on your family’s success.

    • LinRP

      I am so living that reality. My husband has been unemployed since March. Deadbeat? He worked 12 years at his last company, and 18 at the one before that. He has a BS and and MS from MIT. He works in the energy field. He spends days in and day out networking, going out and meeting people, online, doing everything to find a job. He had NO leisure this summer to speak of. He works at this more hours than when in a job! And still no luck. Yet. We always have to keep the faith.

      We have TWO kids in college. We are starting to go through our savings like water, even though I work too. His unemployment benefits and the help we are getting paying Cobra are making ALL the difference between surviving and going down the tubes faster than we already are.

      That gazillionaire bankers and vulture capitalists have the audacity to want to deny my family, and others like ours, the help we need right now in an economy THEY destroyed leaves me apoplectic. People like us are not looking for a free ride, we’re just looking for a way to survive in the gap until we get reemployed. This life is NO fun, despite what some may think. It certainly is not a life of leisure. It is a life filled with stress, and worry, and the real risk of financial ruin.

      This Republican POV that Romney espoused with such incredible cynicism and anger…I say ENOUGH. ENOUGH of that. Time to put him, his ilk, and his mendacious, venal world view in the dustbin of history.

      • William

         Does it bother you that the Obama Administration called people that don’t buy medical insurance dead beats or free loaders? What is that? About 50 million people that don’t have medical insurance are being called free loaders by Obama. That is not an insult to them?

  • JohnGraff

    Put a fork in him; Romney is done!

  • terriermom

    Odd. . .I haven’t heard of Romney campaigning at a homeless shelter or at a banquet for those who are struggling to put food on their table.  Or sitting down with those who work for states’ Dept. of Social Services in the Economic Assistance divisions so he can actually see & hear what he’s talking about.  Mitt, have you ever worried about your kids going hungry or being evicted?  That’s what TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families), or “an entitlement” as you so lovingly call it, is designed for.  And Mitt, it’s temporary, as in 5 years over one’s lifetime, with a work clause.  And yes, some people actually qualify for Food Stamps, now called SNAP, because they’re among the working poor AND pay taxes.  Check out the Federal Poverty Guidelines, Mitt.  That income is your betting change.

  • gonkers

    An improvement, how? He plans the SAME fiscal policies, the same desire to deregulate, and has the same neocon crazies Bush had. Think we won’t be dragged into another pointless war just so we can show the world we’re still top dog?

  • Joseph_Wisconsin

    Alright having now listened to the entire broadcast I have to comment on Stephen Moore. The man is the worst sort of ideologue pushing his theory no matter how big the gap between it and any reality. Not to mention an unapologetic liar continuing to push the false statement that Obama ended existing welfare to work requirements, something everyone outside of the talking point crew of the Republicans and the Romney campaign acknowledges. Also I could not help notice how when pressed to answer how untruthful his basic view of the current situation was his voice went up in pitch and speed as though this would make his arguments more convincing. Like a used car salesman so desperate to close a sale that not going to happen. The surest give away though is how often he tossed out the assertion that “everyone knows that . . .” When are people force to resort to that as an argument? When everyone does not know because it is not true and there are no facts to back it up.

  • Brian Kinnaird

    Can someone please tell me something, anything about the music at the first break (11:30 or so)?  I have been trying to find out who the artist is for going on two years – On Point hasn’t returned my emails or FB posts.

    • http://www.facebook.com/lawrence.ferrara.7 Lawrence Ferrara

       Simply add the App: Shazam to your iphone if you have one. It “listens” to any song and tells you the name and the band…. and of course, where to buy it.

    • http://www.facebook.com/lawrence.ferrara.7 Lawrence Ferrara

       Cafe Del Mar Energy 52

      Seems to be on the CD UltraTrance 09

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Renoir-Gaither/615760671 Renoir Gaither

     

    $50,000 a plate dinner?  This aren’t the people I care about, probably won’t in
    November or the long-term.  Too
    busy trying take responsibility for the lives of my family.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Renoir-Gaither/615760671 Renoir Gaither

      Real visual poetry.  Of course, the Thurston Howell III’s wouldn’t get it.

      • hennorama

        I could barely stop laughing when I first heard the Thurston Howell comparison.  Priceless.

    • OnPointComments

      These high priced dinners have occurred in both parties.

  • http://twitter.com/Kyleleen Kyleleen Cullen

    If 150 million people in our country don’t earn enough money to fall into a tax bracket that pays income tax why don’t we put our efforts into raising their wages?

  • TinaWrites

    The guest says, “this is what we as Conservatives worry about, the tipping point”…. regarding 1/7 people being on food stamps.  Well, then, job creators!  Stop sending our jobs overseas!  Take a little less in profit and compensation and set up training programs so that potential workers can learn the skills you want them to have.  Companies used to do that!  Do you think that Rosy the Riveter just walked into a factory with no training program?  (I know that was a different context.)  You guys just want such a lean operation so that you can eek out every penny of profit for yourselves!  And, for every robot you add to your productivity force, you could contribute to the education of your long-term workers in the subject area of robotics, so that they can learn to do the programming and building of the very machines that will eventually put them all out of work.  

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1523494772 Kevin Kraft

    Stephen Moore is an economist?  You are as out of touch with real working Americans as Romney.  You focus on the small amount of dollars going food stamp programs and unemployment but forget the billions handed over to the rich “entitled” bankers whose greed and ineptitude led to the economic crisis and loss of jobs in the first place.

  • Mike_Card

    Can we just stipulate that Stephen Moore is an unexplainable shit head who should never be allowed a microphone to the public air waves?

  • http://twitter.com/eshadah Enrique Shadah

    Romney spoke like a true Aristocrat.  I am from Latin America, and have seen this kind of conversation too many times.  He seems to believe in a country club economy, where some few millionaires are tended by the “help” or “servants” which include those in the 47%

    • JGC

      I do not know if you watched the video of this Romney Boca Raton fundraising luncheon, but I was struck by the camera position which very closely and inadvertently observed  the waiting staff (whose faces we never saw). They were all dressed in black, except for the white gloves. The white gloves were very prominent, and often floated very close to the camera. This was the help, the servants, and their hands were not to actually touch the plates of the Republican donor audience.  They appeared to be very busy, so I wonder if they had the chance to listen in on the words that were being said within their presence. When I think back on this video, I think of Romney and all the white gloves.

      • OnPointComments

        “When President Obama addresses an elite roster of hipsters and multimillionaires, including hosts Beyoncé and Jay-Z, in New York tonight, he will do so next to a custom-designed tower of $800-per-bottle champagne that dominates the main room at Jay-Z’s 40/40 nightclub. The 350-bottle champagne tower — designed by Jeffrey Beers — is a monument to Jay-Z’s favorite bubbly, Armand de Brignac, which is known colloquially by rappers, clubgoers and connoisseurs as Ace of Spades because of its gold-spade label. “It’s floor-to-ceiling gold bottles in the entire space. It’s beautiful — breathtaking,” a rep for the Flatiron District hot spot told The Post. “It’s the first thing you see when you walk in.” But the White House, which meticulously controls Obama’s image, is not expected to release any photos of the president’s appearance at the lavish club.” –NY Post
        I await your outrage.  I bet the servers aren’t sitting at the tables with the elite roster.

        • jefe68

          Hyperbolic and trite.
          Inanity at it’s most inane.
          It’s not where Romney had the fund raising event it’s what he said.

        • JGC

          Hmmm… a very good point. You know, I keep getting invited to the possibility of attending one of these get-togethers at least five times a day for a small donation. I would love to be there myself to see the atmosphere. I think the servers are working hard and maybe enjoying themselves a bit at the same time, because, hey, it’s Jay-Z and Beyoncé! No getting around that.  But Obama better represents the servers’ interests, and has a closer appreciation of their lives. The funny thing is that both Romney and Obama hate these ever-escalating dog-and-pony fundraising shows, and for that we can all thank the Roberts’ Court decision on Citizens United.

      • hennorama

        One can only imagine the efforts already underway to find at least one of these servers for a pro-Obama commercial.  It will go something like this: Show “the 47%” video for a few seconds, showing a white-gloved server, with Romney’s words on the screen.  Then cut to the server being asked for a reaction, and the server saying “Well, I was in the room when Romney was speaking, serving food to his guests.  I don’t understand why Romney thinks I’m dependent on the government.  I work very hard to support my family and am proud to have never taken a dime in handouts…. ” etc.

        There will likely be a series of these spots, with the little old lady on Social Security, the college student working to put herself to school, the soldier just back from Afghanistan, the couple with their newly adopted baby … the list of people Romney offended is nearly endless.

        This is hitting people right in their hearts, and these type of personalized, heartfelt spots will be quite effective.

  • TinaWrites

    One guest just said that workers on unemployment should be made to show up for some kind of work, even if it is cleaning up the parks!  Has this guy ever been unemployed?  Does he know how long it takes to re-do you resume practically for every type of job that you might be applying for?  Does he know how long it takes to write different cover letters for practically every single job that you might be applying for?  Does he know how long it takes to coordinate your job search, figuring out, even, where some of the jobs might be, so you can figure out if you could even get to the job without losing your shirt on gas money.  Does he know how many jobs people apply for that aren’t even real jobs, just fishing listings listed by people who are trying to figure out where the jobs are that people are willing to leave?!!!  Does he know how many calls people wait for, hoping to talk to someone about the job, only to be frustrated time and time again?  But, God forbid, you should answer an actual call back in a setting that is not conducive to talking about a job with a potential employer:  you could make yourself ineligible just because you answered your cell phone in a setting that the employer judged to show “bad judgment”!!!  But this guy thinks that people should be out there doing any kind of busy work just to show them a lesson!!!  I’ve only been eligible for unemployment three times:  the first time, I was too young to understand what it was, and I didn’t apply for it.  The other two times, I found jobs within two days of becoming eligible, and took the jobs I took just to feel more settled than being on unemployment made me feel.  However, several times, when I was NOT eligible for unemployment but was looking for work, I would not have been so successful because at these other points, there were 200 people applying for every single job I looked at!!!  I would love to know what those figures are today.  That guest is just talking thru the hole in the top of his head, if he even has one!!!

    • Steve__T

       I feel your pain your not alone.

    • hennorama

      Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) has the official numbers at a ratio of about 7 unemployed workers to every 2 job openings.  You may quibble with how they measure these numbers, but that the latest BLS data from July.

  • lou_gubrious

    Tom, next time you’re in Illinois, ask around local employers.  In Indiana, many will tell you that in spite of huge unemployment, they can’t get help.  Even Toyota is having problems, and they long had their pick of workers.  Locals claim employees have simply lost the habit of going to work, and learned to get by on what’s available.  I suggest you check it out yourself, there, not here.  Might make a good program!

  • Lou Osborne

    I am outraged by Willard M. Romney’s comments about the 47%. I am one of the 47% who will vote for Obama, based on his strong dedication to serving ALL people not because I am looking for a handout from the government. I have paid income tax since I first entered the work force as a student. I will retire soon from a job I have held for 30 years. I haven’t earned enough to spend $1,000 on a T-Shirt as Mrs. Romney has worn, but I have contributed to social security, paid my health insurance premiums, and tried to help those less fortunate than I. Shame on you Willard for ever thinking your elitist views would qualify you to be President of the US of America.

    • Gregg Smith

      You should thank the other 53% and be appalled at Obama’s insulting you.

      • jefe68

        Rubbish alert.

        • Gregg Smith

          That’s deep. I feel totally and completely rebuffed on the merits.

  • Pingback: Romney video isn’t ‘investigative reporting,’ as MotherJones claims « The SitRep

  • Kiep99
  • Gordon Green

    Stephen Moore is yet another right-wing propagandist peddling lies.  One among many:

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/28/rick-santorum/Santorum-Romney-claim-Obama-ending-welfare-work/ 

    • Gregg Smith

      Politifact’s record is less than stellar after the Ryan debacle. I’ll take Santorum’s word.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

    This guy is ridiculous.  He will undoubtedly oppose a stimulus based on funding federal and state-funded work projects.  But he’ll support creating work programs so that benefit recipients can work?  He can’t be taken seriously.

    • Gregg Smith

      “… stimulus based on funding federal and state-funded work projects”.

      There is a huge difference between a job created through innovation in the private sector and a public sector job. The former grows the economy, the latter redistributes it by confiscating, borrowing or printing money. The former creates revenue and the latter creates debt.

      The “stimulus” failed. President “Obama” went on and on about “Shovel ready jobs”. He said it over and over. There were none and he had to admit they “weren’t as shovel ready as we thought”. HE MADE A JOKE! A trillion dollar joke. It was a lie then, it’s a lie now. 

      • gonkers

        Some still don’t understand the purpose of government infusions into a weak economy. While projects might be temporary, the nation gets needed infrastructure improvements and all those workers spend those paychecks… guess where. In the PRIVATE economy.

        The GOP uses military spending for the same purpose only it’s not honest about it. It just invents threats to justify the spending.

        • Gregg Smith

          “Those paychecks” are confiscated from others, borrowed or printed. And there weren’t the “shovel ready jobs” as promised. Unemployment is still over 8% after $5T. The “stimulus” failed.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O55aRrvXtio 

          • jefe68

            “Those paychecks” are confiscated from others, borrowed or printed.

            You are so full of crap, that’s not how it works and if you believe this nonsense about money being “confiscated” maybe you should move to Romania or Slovakia where taxes are about 10%. Of course you’ll have to pay for you’re own security, but I hear health care is cheap and the internet connection in Romania is way faster than it is here.

          • Gregg Smith

            Cut the juvenile crap and tell me where the money comes from if it’s not confiscated, printed or borrowed. How can taxation not be considered confiscation of wealth? It may be justified or not, good or bad but it is what it is.

          • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

            we’re objecting to your use of the word “confiscation,” since that implies the taxation wasn’t lawful and proper in the first place.  Since its pretty clearly lawful and we’re debating the merits of its usefulness, that kind of inflammatory language is likely turn people off.

          • Gregg Smith

            Of course it’s lawful, I never claimed otherwise.

            http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/confiscate

            http://www.thefreedictionary.com/confiscate

            The term is accurate.

          • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

            again – posting up to get enough space

          • gonkers

            Please don’t fall for the confiscation argument. The rich are still paying record low taxes. If there’s confiscation it’s from our kids and grandkids. In THAT case G is all for it.

          • Gregg Smith

            The rich are paying more of the bill than ever before.

          • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

            Gregg seyz: “Of course it’s lawful, I never claimed otherwise.
            http://dictionary.reference.co
            http://www.thefreedictionary.c
            The term is accurate.”
            I say: Come on.  ”Confiscate” clearly connotes something illegitimate in this context.  The gist of all your comments appears to be that the wealthy shouldn’t subsidize benefits for other people by taxation.  Fine.  I don’t agree with you, but if you go around calling it “confiscation” as if that wins the argument, you’re just being provocative. Look how Jefe68 responded.  Its harder to take any legit arguments seriously.

          • Gregg Smith

            No, the wealthy should have their money confiscated to subsidize the benefits of others. But if you are talking about $5 trillion in less than 4 years then it damn well better work. It failed.

          • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

            Your first sentence is good to hear.  However, you might consider whether we’re better off with the stimulus before declaring it a failure.  I can anticipate your answer, so lets not rehash the debate.

            Like you said before, the stimulus is financed by debt not tax.  Lets get the Banks to pay for it!  They never did anything but sit on the TARP funds.

          • Gregg Smith

            The TARP funds were repaid and  spent on the “stimulus”. We would have been so so so much better off without the “stimulus”.

          • gonkers

            TARP was already explained to you and you’re back claiming TARP was “repaid”?

            TARP RECYCLED that $700 billion to buy MORE troubled assets.

          • gonkers

            If income tax revenues in real dollars have been LOWER than Clinton’s last year since 2001… then your claim the rich are being soaked is nonsense.

            It’s our KIDS AND GRANDKIDS who are being ripped off… largely to pay for irresponsible TAX CUTS YOU SUPPORT.

          • Gregg Smith

            The rates were lowered in 2003 and revenue increased by over a half trillion dollars by 2007. 2007 in the highest revenue year on record, including Clinton.

          • gonkers

            Why is it you can be corrected on this topic and the next day you’re back to telling the same untruths?

            The Bush tax cuts started to be phased in retroactive to 1-1-01.

            And if you look at income tax receipts in constant dollars they NEVER exceeded Clinton’s last year.

            SIX YEARS OF REDUCED REVENUE IS A DECLINE IN REVENUE EVEN IF REVENUE EVENTUALLY REBOUNDS

          • Gregg Smith

            I proved to that idiot ultras 1000time that the rates were not lowered in any significant way  until 2003.

          • Gregg Smith

            BTW, don’t judge by Jeffe. Look at his comments, they are always irrelevant and nasty. He rarely rebuts, he just tells people how stupid they are.

          • gonkers

            GDP 3ed quarter 08 = -3.7%

            GDP 4th quarter 08 = -8.9%

            GDP 1st quarter 09 = -6.7%

            GDP 2ed quarter 09 = -.07%

            GDP 3ed quarter 09 = +1.7%

            Did the Stimulus work?

            YES!

            Case closed.

            Was it enough?

            Nope.

          • Gregg Smith

            It looks to me like GDP was turning around before the stimulus. A case can be made that TARP worked but not the stimulus. It was money down a rat hole. GDP is still anemic 4 years out. It’s less now than your 3rdQ 09 number.

          • gonkers

            TARP was Q3 of 08… and the biggest decline in GDP was in Q4.

          • Gregg Smith

            Bush implemented half of TARP and Obama the other half.

          • gonkers

            Why wasn’t the Stumulus enough? Because the GDP had dropped so much… nearly 20%.

            The numbers can be deceiving. If we start with an imaginary GDP of $1000 then after those 3 quarters of decline, the result would be about $818.

            Just because the GDP started to grow doesn’t mean much if we were in so deep a hole. It could take 2 years at 2% growth PER QUARTER just to get back to the original $1000

            The Stimulus stemmed the decline, but it wasn’t enough to fill the giant hole in the economy made by irresponsible right wing policies. And the $5 trillion in Bush debt made it more difficult for the government to respond.

             

          • gonkers

            AGAIN, if there’s any confiscation going on, it’s NOT from current tax payers who are paying very LOW tax rates. So PLEASE stop repeating this red herring. In real dollars income tax revenues have NEVER exceeded Clinton’s last year from 2001 on.

            We’re STEALING FROM OUR KIDS AND GRANDKIDS. But then that’s the policy YOU support. You favored the irresponsible Bush tax cuts which were passed when we were 6 TRILLION in debt… and ended our chance to pay down debt.

      • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

        You don’t understand stimulus mechanics or how a stimulus assists the economy.  You also don’t respond to my main point, which is that taxes or tax breaks needed to fund the work programs this guest proposed would cost alot of money, especially if 1 in 7 Americans were really participating in the foodstamps (or whatever large scary figure was thrown out on the air) and were all required to work.  Presumably, that would result in more debt.

        Otherwise, you’re entertaining.  I’ve never had anyone question whether the president’s name is really “Obama” before.

        • Gregg Smith

          Ha ha, I can’t explain it. The quotes on Obama must have been some kind of Freudian slip or something. I just now am having my first glass of wine, can’t blame it. I’m a stickler for things like that but you got me. I can’t even come up with a good excuse. I still kinda’ like it.

          So, thank you very much but I understand the alleged theory of Keynesian economics. I just don’t think it works and Obama’s “stimulus” is yet more proof.

          As to your main point, we will not agree. “Taxes” and “tax breaks” are polar opposites and you conflate them.

          • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

            From the point of view of revenue (your main concern is debt, right?), they are definitely not polar opposites.

          • Gregg Smith

            Writing a check (paying taxes) is the polar opposite from not writing a check (keeping more of what you’ve earned via tax break).

          • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

            This space is too small – I’m posting my reply to your original response

      • jefe68

        Oh boy, I guess the Hoover, Grand Cooley and the entire Interstate highway system don’t count. Neither do any of the lucrative government contracts bushiness get from government be it military or otherwise.

        You know some of the stimulus did work, and some did not. That happened during the Great depression as well. We are in the largest downturn since the Great Depression and I doubt any president, Republican or Democrat could have turned it around in 4 years. The Republicans did everything in their power to thwart President Obama from doing anything. I’m sick and tired of the same old regressive canards from folks of your ilk. The GOP goes and on about spending and point their insipid fingers at poor folk and blame them for the nations ills. All the while they have been party to the ruinous Wall Street policies and the obscene spending of two wars that have been waging for over a decade.

        You want to vote for a man such a Romney, go ahead. I’ll say this, he’s no GW Bush.

        • Gregg Smith

          “The Great Depression” would have been “The Mediocre Depression” if not for Keynesian economics. And no, that does not mean I hate the Hoover Dam. It doesn’t have to be like this. Obama made it so. 

          • gonkers

            No recession that involves the collapse of the banking sector is an ordinary recession. Reagan didn’t have to deal with a collapsed banking sector, nor a collapsed housing and automotive sectors and unemployment was 7% and higher for FIVE YEARS. And tax rates were certainly low when Bush imploded the economy. They didn’t help there either. Yet the economy did fine with the HIGHER tax rates under Ike, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, and Ford where the top rate was between 70-90%.  

            So please tell us how tax cuts are some magic bullet.

            They are not. They are just a pretense to benefit the rich while creating massive debt to undermine the safety net.   

          • Gregg Smith

            Revenue was less as a percentage of GDP on average under Bush’s rates than Eisenhower’s. The real growth came when they were cut by Kennedy. 

          • gonkers

            NBER credits the growth in the 60′s to a “wartime expansion”.

            There are plenty of other variables in an economy but you always falsely attribute everything to tax rates. The recovery from the Reagan Recession got it’s boost not from tax cuts but collapsing oil prices.

          • Gregg Smith

            No I don’t. I understand very well that tax rates are but one variable. It’s Obama that says if we don’t hike the top rte then children with autism will suffer.

            The monolithic view comes from those who say (they say it all the time), “The economy did fine when rates were 90%” while ignoring all else.

      • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

        Gregg Smith seyz: ”
        Writing a check (paying taxes) is the polar opposite from not writing a check (keeping more of what you’ve earned via tax break).”

        I say:  You are not thinking about this clearly.  To fund either a stimulus program or a work-benefits program, the government will provide employers with tax revenue or allow them to keep revenue that would otherwise be taxed (this is a tax break).  In both cases, the employer ends up with more money and the government ends up poorer.  That’s why its difficult to take the WSJ guy seriously – he’s willing to spend $ to ensure “personal responsibility” and create government debt, but he’s not willing to spend the same $ to create infrastructure projects, jobs and  consumer demand (stimulating investment, production, etc) and ongoing additional employment because it creates debt.  To me, that makes him less than credible.

        • Gregg Smith

          Whose money is it?

          • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

            You’re going to have to explain what you’re talking about.  I don’t understand your point.

          • Gregg Smith

            If you are going to equate money paid (tax) with money not paid (tax break) then we need to establish whose money it is.

          • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

            why? What difference does it make? What are you suggesting?

          • Gregg Smith

            It’s a freedom thing, you wouldn’t understand.

          • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

            posting up

          • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

            “Gregg Smith” seyz: ”
            It’s a freedom thing, you wouldn’t understand.”

            I say: I haven’t actually interacted with someone who seems to be deliberately trying to provoke, rather than engage in discussion in quite some time.  How interesting.

            So, are you saying that all taxation is an unconscionable infringement on your freedom, or just taxation that is used to benefit someone else if it doesn’t directly benefit you?  Or is it just that you object to having tax revenues go to people you don’t like?  Or just for policies you disagree with?

          • Gregg Smith

            After you wrote: “You are not thinking about this clearly” and “You don’t understand stimulus mechanics or how a stimulus assists the economy”, I figured I was confronted. The most I can concede is I have gotten a little more snarky since I’ve become such a pariah around here. Sometimes I may unfairly be a bit too quick to go there but I think I was pretty patient this time. So, I prefer to look at it as “reluctantly drawn in” as opposed to “deliberately trying to provoke”. Having said that, your criticism is fair but not accurate. 

            Taxation is NOT an “unconscionable infringement” on my freedom but it IS confiscating my money. I don’t mind helping others but I don’t want the government mandating my generosity. I do a better job myself based on my own values.

            It all comes dow to whose money you think it is.

  • traveller2

    Why doesn’t anyone on the panel point out that people who don’t pay income tax ARE working? They’re working their butts off – they just don’t make enough money. They’re not “moochers;” they’re the WORKING poor (along with seniors, etc.). The Wall Street journalist is offensive (“the food-stamp President?!”) But I don’t find the Democrat from Ohio convincing either: all she’s doing here is hitting the DNC “talking points.” Why not find someone who can talk about this issue from an intelligent, careful, THOUGHTFUL, non-partisan perspective?  

    • hennorama

      Not to worry.  Let’s have comments on important topics from as many viewpoints as possible.  The asshats out themselves, as Mr. Romney so ably demonstrated, and they do provide some entertainment value, to boot.

      “Sunshine is said to be the best disinfectant.” – Justice Louis D. Brandeis

    • Joseph_Wisconsin

      I agree with you about Marcy Kaptur.  David Corn was there to provide adequate response to the clown from the WSJ.  Now the WSJ editorial board has always had a bias towards the interests of the wealthy, especially the Wall Street investor class that Romney represents.  To be expected.  However, since Rupert Murdoch assumed ownership it has become FOX News in print, the same steeply ideological and partisan agenda and just as much of a fact free zone.  The time Kaptur spent speaking could have been better devoted to more calls from listeners. 

  • hennorama

    Reading the “ONPOINT TODAY” section of this site makes me feel sorry for the guy from Hour 2, Steven Johnson, author of “Future Perfect.”  Did anyone listen?  30 comments vs. nearly 800 here.

    • JGC

      I thought exactly the same thing.

    • Gregg Smith

      I am amazed at what garners comments, this is a non-issue to me.

      • JGC

        What??!! What??!! Why not?! This is like a mini psychological Rorschach test. Who knows. Maybe I am working on my fifth master’s degree in psychological behavior, and you are all my test bunnies..

        • Gregg Smith

          The “Truther” show got 3K.

    • Joseph_Wisconsin

       The relative preponderance of comments always exists whenever the subject of politics, or its underlying issues such as taxation, the economy, foreign policy, etc. is the topic of one hour and the other hour is not such a partisan provoking subject.  Just look at the similar imbalance in past shows.  

      Gregg Smith is “amazed at what garners comments” and it “is a non-issue” to him only because he being a staunch rightwing Republican wishes that this was not in the news at all.  There are so many comments here now it would be time consuming, but it would be interesting to count how many of the 954 comments (as I post this comment) are authored by Gregg Smith, WorriedfortheCountry, or others  from the small but prolific group of dedicated rightwingers  always ready to present their point of view and also to present the latest posts from rightwing news and blog sites, on topic or red herrings.

      • hennorama

        I was making an offhand comment on the imbalance and how Mr. Stevens may feel as a result, nothing more.

        I have no problem with a few posters, myself included, posting frequently.  Regardless of one’s view, public commentary and discussion is a good thing.  We need more of it, not less.  It’s a bit awkward in forums such as this, since comments are both written and non-simultaneous.  Plus, it is difficult to convey some meanings, especially sarcasm, in this format.

        The relative anonymity offered here results in comments that are be much less likely to be made in person, and therefore comments tend to be more outrageous and absolutist.

        Still, it’s valuable and can be fun.  And people can (and do) learn things in here.  Minds can be changed by words, so you never know …

  • workingmandan

    To an extent the macro-political lansdscape doesn’t get any simpler to understand than what we see displayed by the political leaders right now. Romney mentions his view on the group of Americans he refers to as the “entitled”  but he refrains from mentioning the group of Americans on the other side of the continuum — the “privileged”. Both groups theoretically affect American socio-economics in a negative way… What saves our nation is the middle class. So who to support? One question to ask is which group positively helps build the middle class. (food for thought) … One way to tell of a person or group is of the “priveleged” variety is to suggest that the wealthy and successful should recognize that they acquired their wealth and success as a result of the participation of everyone else in the market; for example the consumers. A person or group from the “priveleged” persuasion will vehemently deny that this is so even at the risk of being observed standing on a “purely illogical” foundation. I give President Obama a great deal of my appreciation for having the courage to mention the logical truth! … To recap — we’ve got the “privileged”, the “entitled”, and the rest of us with decreasing discretionary cash and an increasing unemployment trend … who’s got a bonafide plan to provide for the obvious soci-poolitical need?

  • gonkers

    Is WBUR’s Disqus forum always this wacky? It’s sluggish as hell, responses end up elsewhere, system errors prevent me from posting. Perhaps WBUR should go back to the Ideal BB forum software they were running back in 2006.

  • Lynn Beinke

    What a joke. He invests his money off shore so he doesn’t pay all his income taxes. He won’t disclose his tax reports. If the 47% had been born as white upper class Americans they probably be happy to pay their income taxes. That is what this election is all about: WASPs are afraid they are losing the majority of people in the country. They espouse high moral standards but do not follow them. I’m glad he is putting his foot in his mouth and revealing to the American public what kind of person he really is.

  • newpathformom

    What statistics are available to tell us just how many of that 47% that don’t pay income tax work at least 40 hours a week or more? Also, what about the decreased value of wages today as opposed to 30 years ago? When it takes all of that wage to cover the basics, to put a roof over a family’s head and food in their mouths, what is left for taxes? At the same time the difference in real earnings for the wealthy has increased by incredible amounts. Incidentally, I live in an area where poverty is high, and most of the poor would identify as Republican, ready to vote for Romney. If he thinks  that this 47% are Obama supporters, he doesn’t understand where some of his base comes from.

  • Gregg Smith

    Okay, this one goes out to all the fans of “You didn’t build that”. The infrastructure, internet and everything connected to them are for everyone. If the rich, who paid a ton for said infrastructure, are expected to pay yet more then why should 47% who benefitted just as much from the infrastructure pay nothing?

    • TomK_in_Boston

      It’s inappropriate to say “yet more” re those who are paying the second lowest, or the lowest, rates since 1929.

      • Gregg Smith

        Thank you for finally changing your charge to “second lowest”, but why do you still qualify it after all this time?
        You are deflecting, the question is about the 47% who are expected to pay nothing. Why? They got the same infrastructure and paid a hell of lot less for it, didn’t they?

        • TomK_in_Boston

          I haven’t changed anything, sorry. I’ve said all along that those who can finagle the 15% have the lowest rate since 1929. There’s no need to go beyond that and it’s ridiculous to refer to those getting such a free ride as paying “even more”. It would be equally ridiculous to refer to those paying the second lowest rate since 1929 as paying “even more”. “Even more” means that they are already paying a high rate, and the opposite is true.

          The 47% pay plenty, just not income tax. Our system is supposed to be one of progressive income tax. If you’re far enough down, or elderly, or disabled, etc, I have no problem with the rate going to zero. As more income is redistributed to the top, more peons will have less income to pay tax on. Those of us who have more are supposed to give back more. 

          C’mon, get real, we all know the “47%” is a talking point. Anyone who was really concerned about revenue would not have his knickers in a twist about someone with nothing paying nothing, while billionaires are paying 13%. Ever hear of “follow the money”?

          • Gregg Smith

            You used to say “the lowest” until I called you on it. The 47% don’t pay any more than the rest for the taxes you refer to but far less on income tax.

          • TomK_in_Boston

            You’re a legend in your own mind. Next you’ll be complimenting yourself for “hitting a nerve” or some such.

            Those who can claim the 15% rate, from real divs and cap gains or from scams like romneys, pay the LOWEST.

            And it’s all a diversion, anyway. The point is that the “47%” nonsense is designed to divert attention from the unsustainable low rates at the top.

            Concern that those paying 15% or 13% might be asked to pay “even more” – ROTFL. Get real. The USA is privileged white boy paradise.

          • Gregg Smith

            That’s sick.

    • Robert Gerwien

      Why do you say they pay nothing? As a percent of their income they pay more than anyone.  100% of a poor and near poor person’s income is exposed to taxes. A very small percentage of a very wealthy person’s income is exposed to taxes and for most of them it is at a much lower rate.

      • Gregg Smith

        Fair point but the discussion is about income taxes. I try to be careful to always include the word “income” but it gets tedious. 

        However, if you must, I will go there. Paying Payroll taxes is paying into a system that pays you back.. at a premium. Consumption taxes are optional at some level. Income taxes are taxes on achievement.

        • http://www.facebook.com/jbrabby Jared Brown

          My mutual funds are real high achievers.

    • hennorama

      Without arguing the concept of private data transmission systems vs. public infrastructure, and the premise that 47% of people who use the Internet or “the infrastructure” ”pay nothing” for it, I will counter with a somewhat Reductio ad absurdum comment.

      Let us assume that we all agree that “Everyone should pay something” when discussing Federal Income Tax (FIT), which seems to be the view that Mr. Romney and his camp, and you personally, are expressing.  Fine.  Everyone has to pay at least one dollar ($1.00) of FIT, annually.

      First, we need to define “everyone.”  Every person living in the US?  Every citizen?  Everyone over age 13, 18, 21?  Everyone under age 100?  Everyone who votes?  Everyone who drives?  Everyone who has income of any kind?

      OK, let’s assume this gets resolved somehow and we’ve defined “everyone.”

      Now let’s think about the incomes of “everyone.”

      What happens if I have no income?  I got injured while playing soccer, and can’t work the whole year.  Do I still have to pay the $1?

      What happens if I have income of $1.00, or $10, or $100 or $1000?  Do I still have to pay the $1?  Does the answer chnage if I have dependents?

      What if I run a business, the economy goes into a Great Recession, and I lose all my customers and have a loss?  Do I still have to pay the $1?

      What if I have no income, sell $10 million of stock at a loss?  I have $10 million in the bank now.  Do I still have to pay the $1?

      Do you see how things get a bit silly when you say “Everyone should pay something” ?

      • Gregg Smith

        Your characterization of what “seems to be” is fair but not so. Romney was not lamenting it, he was accepting the fact that those who benefit from everything Obama was talking about with his “You didn’t build that” comment were not going to vote for him. He was pointing out the perils of a Democracy as opposed to a Republic. When there are more wolves voting for the dinner menu than sheep then we have a liberty problem. It’s real.

        And no, I don’t think it’s silly. I believe to the pit of my soul with every fiber of my being income is a choice for the vast majority to Americans.  

        • hennorama

          I understand and respect your point of view.

          However, the argument about “shouldn’t everyone pay something/have skin in the game” or similar is absolutist and frays when one looks at the extremes of “everyone.”

          I could more easily agree with a premise “shouldn’t MORE American households pay some Federal Income Tax (FIT)?”  This is much easier to answer affirmitavely.

          • Gregg Smith

            Okay, “more”. I certainly hope you agree 47% is too high. There is a lot of pining for the economy and rates of Clinton or Eisenhower but far more people paid taxes then. 

          • hennorama

            Whoa … Gregg – good on ya, mate!  You opened up a bit and came off an absolute view.  Way to go! (This is NOT sarcasm FYI)

            So if “the 47%” is too high, where should we start?

            Do we cut/eliminate the tax breaks (deductions, credits, classification of various types of income, etc.)?  Which ones?

            Is there another way to do this without changing the tax code?

            Serious questions.

          • Gregg Smith

            My view has not changed. i’m not an absolutist.

          • Steve__T

            I believe to the pit of my soul with every fiber of my being income is a choice for the vast majority to Americans.
             
            No your not an absolutist.

          • Gregg Smith

            That’s my belief. If I was an absolutist I would have not said “vast majority”.

    • jimino

      Roads are financed by the gas and property taxes, two totally regressive taxes.

      • Gregg Smith

        President Obama says our bridges will crumble without a tax hike on the rich.

        • J__o__h__n

          They are crumbling. 

          • Gregg Smith

            Jimino says gas and property taxes will fix them.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        An interesting factoid:  the commercial trucking industry pays 36% of all road use taxes.

    • gonkers

       How are the rich paying so much when in inflation corrected dollars income tax revenues are still BELOW Clinton’s last year? That’s ELEVEN years with low income tax receipts.

      Your argument hinges largely on the illusion that if the rich pay a larger percentage of a shrinking tax pie, they must be paying more in actual dollars.

      Of course they COULD pay more at lower rates if they capture a larger percentage of the INCOME pie.

      • Gregg Smith

        You are skipping the Bush boom. In 2003 rates across the board were dramatically lowered. By 2007 revenue (in inflation adjusted numbers) was $2,413.1 Billion. Clinton’s best year was $2,309.2 Billion. So you are wrong.

        • gonkers

          Nonsense. If I INCLUDE all of Bush’s eight years by definition I’m INCLUDING what you dub the Bush “Boom”… cheap economic growth built on debt and military spending.

          If we’re to see a supply side revenue feedback from income tax cuts we should see it in INCOME TAX REVENUES… not corporate taxes or payroll taxes.

          You love to brag about Bush’s 2 years where in constant dollars he FINALLY exceeded Clinton’s last year in revenue. But if we look at just on-budget revenues to exclude borrowing from off-budget accounts, there’s only ONE Year. Just look at income tax revenue and there’s NO increase over Clinton’s last year.

          It’s absolutely Orwellian to claim that 8 YEARS of LOWER income tax revenue than Clinton = a revenue boom. But that’s what you claim here 24/7.

           

  • TomK_in_Boston

    If anyone hasn’t learned the righty playbook yet, the “47%” talking point is the “attack where you are weak” tactic, one of their favorites.

    I first noticed it when they ran a vietnam draft dodger against a vietnam vet. You might think they’d run away from any talk of military service, but no, they attacked and smeared the vet, successfully.

    Now, their whole agenda is class warfare and they have done a marvelous job of redistributing the wealth of the middle class to the top, so you might think they would run from any mention of class warfare. But no, they accuse anyone who challenges their policies of class warfare – a great “Big Lie”.

    Now, top tax rates are second lowest since 1928, and financial con men like romney who can claim the 15% rate have the lowest rates. You’d think they would run like crazy from any discussion of who pays. But no – attack where you are weak! Go on the offensive about those who have so little that they pay no tax. Good tactic!

    The beautiful thing is that, as more income is redistributed to the top, the oligarchs WILL pay more tax, even with absurdly low rates, and the peons who have less will pay less. So, the more their class warfare succeeds making the rich even richer, the more they can howl about the huge burden the poor rich people bear. Pretty good, huh? The richer they are, the more they are suffering! ROTFL.

    As always, the sad thing for the USA is that some voters can’t tell the difference between reality and propaganda.

  • nj_v2

    Wow. Ultimate damning by faint praise. A fresh, steaming heap of dog excrement would have been an improvement over Bush.

    Why do wingers have such low standards?

  • wander24

    No, I was not fusing the two together. You made that assumption, as did Romney. I was responding to the program and its reference to those who don’t pay FIT and also receive assistance. Perhaps responding with less anger and judgement might be helpful.

    And, although those making between 75,000 to 100,000 is the fastest growing group not paying FIT, it is still less than 1% of the 47%. Of course these are due to legal federal credits and deductions put into place by both the former and current administration.

  • StilllHere

    As a person who works for a living, there’s no way I could support the Democrats.  They reward the lazy and those who would rather be victims.

    • libraryshortcake

      That’s so ignorant. I am among the 47% Romney spoke of, the vast majority of whom work for a living, pay taxes, pay into social security, pay for health care, paid back (or our paying back) student loans, and would only use social services such as unemployment benefits or food stamps as a temporary safety net and last resort (thank goodness I’ve never had to).

      The views you share with Romney are not only largely incorrect, but they strike me as unethical, immoral, and motivated by greed.

    • Vandermeer

      Some of those who don’t pay federal income taxes DO pay  federal payroll taxes… and they pay more then Mr. Romney’s 13.9%
      Check out reality!!!!!!!

  • Potter

    Romney said yesterday:

    “The president’s view is one of a larger government; I disagree,” Mr. Romney said in an interview on Fox News. “I think a society based on a government-centered nation where government plays a larger and larger role, redistributes money, that’s the wrong course for America.”

    In order to justify his outrageous comments at that 50K dinner does he have to exaggerate and mischaracterize the President’s view pushing all the hot buttons? YES! Does Obama REALLY want a “government-centered nation where the government pays a larger and larger role, redistributes etc etc ” ??? NO!!

    The more he explains the the more he reveals of who he is.

    • Gregg Smith

      “I actually believe in redistribution” -Barack Obama 

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge3aGJfDSg4&feature=youtu.be

      • Ray in VT

        “to a certain extent so that everyone has a shot”.  The GOP believes in redistribution too.  Their policies have delivered that distribution up the ladder for years.

        http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/10/income-inequality-america

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/25/income-distribution-in-2008_n_1030201.html

        http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph

        • Gregg Smith

          Wealth cannot be redistributed up. None of your links illustrates that concept. The Huffpo link actually says money is distributed. Money is not distributed it’s earned.

          The premise is because the wealth gap exist it must mean the rich got rich at the expense of the poor. Not so. The poor did not send the rich checks. They didn’t even have to pay income taxes. 

          I think the theory is if the rich keep more of what they eartn then that somehow means they took it from the poor. It’s crazy.

          • Ray in VT

            Money is distributed throughout society, so it is distributed, whether or not that distribution occurs naturally or as a matter of policy.

            Money may or may not be earned.  The Steinbrenner boys got awfully lucky (financially speaking) that their dad died during a year that there was no inheritance tax so that they could become instant billionaires without having to do a tap except having been born and stay alive.

            So is it just a coincidence that the wealthiest members of society have done amazingly well over the past 30 years during a time when tax policy has favored many of their activities?  Is it just a coincidence that CEOs have made millions while shipping good paying American jobs overseas while the economy has replaced those jobs with service economy jobs that pay much less.  Has not Walmart made the Waltons fabulously wealthy while they have driven many local businesses out of business and pressured companies to out source their production?

            Not all who acquire wealth do it at the expense of the poor(er), but if one is making millions by raiding worker pension funds, then one is certainly doing just that.

            I think that the theory that if we just keep cutting taxes on the wealthiest members of society, who have acquired a greater and greater share of the total income and wealth of our society, then we’ll all magically benefit is absolute madness.

          • Gregg Smith

            No one is advocating your theory. Steinbrenner earned his money he should be able to do with it as he pleases. His sons did not take it from the poor. 

            Please tell me how it works. How is money taken from the poor and given to the rich. The existence of a gap does not mean squat.  

          • Ray in VT

            Bull crap.  That is what trickle down is all about.  Cut taxes on the wealthy, and we’ll all be better off.  Like that guy who used to work for Bain who argued that it’s not a problem that only a very small fraction of our population controls a huge amount of the wealth, and, in fact, they really need more of it.

            The Steinbrenner boys didn’t take the money from the poor directly, although it is certainly true that it is the masses of people who have gone to Yankee games and bought the merchandise or paid the cable bill that pays the YES network that have lined their pockets.  I don’t have a problem with the inheritance tax.  It’s been around for over 100 years, and it was seen in part as a way to limit the massive accumulation of wealth by a very few, creating families and individuals who were wealthy for generation after generation without having to do anything.  You want to talk about discouraging work ethic?  How about having a permanent class of super wealthy who never have to raise a finger?

            The rich can suck  money from the poor through a variety of means, including the ones that I have already mentioned above, including driving independent businesses out of business and pushing profits to executives and large shareholders.  One can directly exploit the labor of the poor via coercive means.  One can manipulate labor or commodities markets so as to drive down wages or the prices paid for goods while enriching oneself from the labor of others.  One could push up rental rates in an area, if one had the means, so as to extract more from renters.  I’m sure that there are more, but those are the ways that I can think of off of the top of my head.

            I mean hey, if you think that having an income distribution similar to a Third World nation is a good thing, then don’t worry, we’re already there, and all that we have to do is keep pushing the same GOP tax policies that have gone on for decades.  A few people will get trickled down on, and maybe you’re one of those guys.  I mean, rich guys gotta board their hay burners somewhere, right?

          • Gregg Smith

            No one is advocating a tax cut for the top rate and hike for the bottom. No one.

            So who made the poor go to those Yankee games and enrich Steinbrenner? Who forces the poor to be stuck in a dead end job with little pay? No one can make me work for peanuts. Raising rent is a market issue, if the market can’t support it then the home will sit empty. Who tells people where they must live? None of that is redistributing money up. 

            People write checks to the government under penalty of law. Much of that money is given to people who do not write checks to the government. They receive tax credits (not refunds). That is redistribution.  

            And then you go on about me wanting third world dynamics.  Where do you get that?

          • Ray in VT

            How are we going to get the 47% to get some skin in the game without them paying?  Is the elimination of a tax break an hike?  We can’t say what Romney’s tax plan is, because he’s been  pretty unclear about what he would do.

            So when a few people control the market and use it to squeeze the most money out of people, then that’s not redistributing money up even if the net result is that a few people are massively enriched with the money that they acquire from the many?  Interesting.  As long as it’s the market that’s doing it, then that’s okay.  Well, the market always knows what’s best and does the right thing.

            As to the 3rd World, if you think that the current income and wealth distribution in the US is ok, then you must be ok with the 3rd World distribution, because that is where the numbers put us.  We have the most income and wealth inequality of any major industrial country.  I don’t want equality of outcomes, but I would be happy with the distribution that we had only a generation or so ago.

          • gonkers

             Of COURSE some on the Right are advocating tax HIKES on the poor and tax CUTS for the rich.

            Cain’s 999 plan was such a regressive tax plan.

        • StilllHere

          Defying the law of gravity … you got some explaining to do.

          • Ray in VT

            Is that supposed to be some sort of intelligent critique of my comment?  If so, then you have failed.

      • gonkers

        Think Wyoming could have built its share of the internet highway system without a redistribution of wealth from the other states?

      • hennorama

        Is your point that if you believe in redistribution, you are a horrible person, or you should not be President?

        I just want to be sure we’re clear on this.

        What is “redistribution” anyway?  Do any tax credits qualify?  Do only refundable tax credits qualify?  What about Social Security?  Medicare?  Disability payments?  Unemployment compensation?  Education vouchers?

        Just want to be clear what the terms mean.

        • Gregg Smith

          Potter wrote: “ Does Obama REALLY want a “government-centered nation where the government pays a larger and larger role, redistributes etc etc ” ??? NO!!” and I refuted with evidence his comment. I did not make a judgement on redistribution one way or the other.

          Tax credits are redistribution certainly. Social security and Medicare are programs one pays into. Vouchers, Disability and Unemployment  compensation are also redistribution of wealth. 

          • hennorama

            OK I understand your point more clearly now.  Thanks for the response.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Uh oh.  Mother Jones promised to release the full Romney video.

    Now they say they can’t.  The video has 1-2 minutes missing from the critical Romney comments.  Maybe Carter the III has it?

    Didn’t they question Brietbart up and down for not releasing the complete tape of the government worker? I haven’t heard the ‘objective’ media question if this tape is complete or edited.

    No media double standard here. Move on.

    • J__o__h__n

      Brietbart edited the tape to twist her message.  Romney has admitted that was what he said.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Romney said it was ‘inartful’.  I agree.

        Perhaps it is less ‘inartful’ if we had the full comments since he was responding to a question about political process and getting the voters in the middle.

        Frankly, I find the media’s obsession both disturbing and unbalanced.

        • Ray in VT

          What was it that the Romney campaign said when they took that 2008 Obama comment out of context to use it in an ad?  Wasn’t it something like we don’t care if it was out of context.  This might be a live by the sword, die by the sword situation.  Recall all of the hullabaloo around the “you didn’t build that” comment.  One could certainly argue that these situations are similar and that people will read into comments what they want to based upon the biases and opinions that they bring to the table.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Karen-Kim/100001041920513 Karen Kim

    Stephen Moore says we need to get everyone – even the poor – paying federal income tax.  How about we get all corporations paying their share of tax – like GE, which pays no tax.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Yes.

      Everyone should have skin in the game, even if it is a small amount. You can do that and still keep progressivity in the tax code.

      Romney’s tax reform (or Simpson-Bowles) will solve the corp. tax nonsense.  The bigger problem is the corp. tax structure is killing US jobs.  The reform needs to simplify the code, lower rates, and eliminate the special loopholes that GE takes advantage of.  It is crazy to have a tax code greater than 74,000 pages.

      GE has hired 1000 tax lawyers who spend all their time figuring ways to avoid US taxes.  Often, many of their efforts result in arbitrarily moving jobs to lower tax countries like Ireland and Switzerland.

      • Vandermeer

         Hellooooo… Romney has not really fleshed out his tax reform policies… no indication of what loopholes he will close.

        • J__o__h__n

          Probably not the one for dressage horses.

          • Vandermeer

             I agree… or the ones that apply to bank accounts in Switzerland.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Ole Mitt’s off shore accounts don’t lower his taxes.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          The specific loopholes don’t matter to Romney’s economic growth argument.

           The specific loopholes are a political priority and Romney is correct to say they should be sorted out on a bi-partisan basis.  His opponents want the loophole details now so they can use it to divide voters with misinformation.

          Also, you are conflating individual taxes vs. corporate taxes.

          • Vandermeer

             Do you really want to vote for a guy whose policies are secret so they won’t be used as a criteria for choosing him as President? By the way, Mr. Romney’s campaign is a great contributor of daily MISINFORMATION!!!

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             The reality is congress writes the tax law.  The presidential candidate can provide the framework that he is willing to accept and sign.  That is what Romney has done.

            -simplification to grow the economy
            -lower rates and broaden the base to grow the economy
            -keep progressive balance -rich will pay the same burden
            -encourage investment by middle class by waiving taxes on dividends and cap. gains for middle class

          • Vandermeer

            You have no specifics here… by the way most people who have capital gains are not the middle class… here’s an example of Romney helping the 1% more than the average joe…
            okay… bye bye!

      • J__o__h__n

        Hiring the tax lawyers makes them job creators and thus immune from criticism.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           LOL.

          I thought lawyers were mostly parasites sucking on society.

          It is worse than wasting money on digging and filling ditches because these lawyers are actively moving real jobs out of the country.

  • phildunk

    The
    defensive “pivot” for the Leder fundraiser to an offensive position is to talk
    about the alleged “redistribution of wealth” supposedly promoted by GOP opponents and the
    propensity for GOP opponents to favor “giveaways.”

     

    The hope
    is that the debate will be reduced to arguing about who are the people not
    paying any federal income taxes, who are those receiving “safety net” services,
    with the general assertion, eloquently advanced by Stephen Moore of the WSJ,
    that if you pay people not to work they won’t make any effort to work.  The effort will be to return the
    argument to the Welfare Queens driving their Cadillacs to the Welfare office to
    collect money and foodstamps paid for by hardworking people.

     

    Until now
    no one, that I’ve heard, has pointed out that the trend in redistribution of
    wealth by government has gone to the wealthiest among us.  Consider these facts.

     

    Between
    2007 to 2009:

     

    Net
    welfare to banks = $1.5 trillion.

    Bonus
    welfare to 4675 bank executives = $32.6 billion (ave. $6 million)

    Share of
    national wealth of top 1% went from 34.7% to 37.1%

    Loss of
    household wealth = $14 trillion

     

    So, when
    Stephen Moore says that “when you pay people not to work, they won’t work,” no
    one asks him how he feels about paying people who lose money and trash everyone else’s personal economy, to continue
    practices to lose more money (Goldman Sachs) and throw more people under the bus.

     

    Stephan
    Moore thinks it is terrible to distribute $72 billion worth of foodstamps to 47
    million people ($1,530 each) so they can eat, but doesn’t have a problem
    distributing $32.6B to 4675 bank executives ($6M each) so they can maintain
    their yachts.

     

    This hypocrisy
    is at the foundation of the problem. 
    Stephen Moore is the quintessential intellectual hypocrite and should be
    repudiated instead of respected. 

  • onasus

    As a social worker for the past 30 years, what always disturbs me about discussions about “entitlement” programs is the mentality that beneficiaries are to blame for needing help.  People believe this until they are the ones that need help and then they see these entitlements as lifesavers, the safety net they are designed to be.  No one is living luxuriously on Section 8, Food Stamps or public assistance.  No one ever talks about how much aid these programs actually provide to families. The specifics:  In RI, a family of 3 can get $554 per month in public assistance if they have no income.  They also receive Food Stamps.  But imagine trying to survive on this little amount per month!  Get someone on your show to uppack the reality of these entitlements and the lives of beneficiaries!!!!

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       No one is talking about eliminating the safety net.

      However, wouldn’t it be great to have a goal reduction of the use of the safety net by giving people the opportunity to have good jobs by growing the economy at a faster rate than 1.5%?

      Further, there are plenty of people who game the system and abuse it.  Not everyone but it is a significant number and there appears to be no effort to clean it up.

    • TomK_in_Boston

      As I said below, the “47%” talking point is mainly smoke to deflect attention from the free ride the rich and the corporations are getting.

      But there is more. With a progressive tax system, which Americans once agreed on, those at the bottom are supposed to pay a low rate, and those at the top a high rate. Obviously we’ve discarded those ideal at the top, and what we’re seeing is that the right would like to discard them at the bottom, too. So we really have an attack on progressive taxation. No surprise there.

      The 47% include the elderly, the disabled, and those with deductions for children and taking the low wage jobs (earned income) left after the romney types do their thing. I thought the right liked incentives for work and reproduction. Bush increased the child tax credit, now Etchasketch says you’re a loser if you use it.

      Truly a sick party.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Wait a second.  Romney wants to keep a progressive tax system.

        However, shouldn’t everyone — except maybe the truly indigent — have skin in the game?  What is wrong with that concept.

        The irony is both Reagan’s tax reform and the Bush tax cuts eliminated the lower 47% from paying income taxes and not having skin in the game.

        Yeah, those evil republicans made the tax system more progressive.

        • TomK_in_Boston

          The relatively sane pre-TeaOP republicans did make the system more progressive at the bottom, while making it less progressive at the top. The bonkers current gang of republicans are now attacking “the 47%” for using the tax code written by the sane republicans. Crazy!

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             You didn’t answer my question about ‘skin in the game’ as a philosophy.

            I’m not against a progressive tax but the flat income tax in MA protects all tax payers because the politicians are loath to raise taxes because they’d have to raise taxes on everyone.

          • hennorama

            Please see my post above, responding to your “skin” philosophy, and perhaps respond to it in some cogent fashion.

  • StilllHere

    Social Security Disability recipients are at a record level of over 8 million, this increase has coincided with the populace of those who have exhausted extended unemployment benefits.  Have we created a culture of dependency?

    • Gregg Smith

      Yes but we can’t talk about it.

    • hennorama

      This phenomenon is not unique to these economic times.  It occurs when the length of time it takes people to find work becomes extended.  In other words, when people who are out of work have great difficult finding work.

      I’m not saying this is good or bad, just presenting info.

      As I’ve said before, the most worrisome aspect of the current job picture is the number of people who have been out of work for long periods.  Any efforts to increase employment should focus on these workers, as they are the most likely to NOT find work when hiring picks up, and therefore are the most likely to receive Federal support, whether it be housing, nutrition, cash assistance or disability.

  • Catskinner

    Tom Ashbrook kept saying, “I don’t have a dog in this hunt,” just before he kept coming to the defense of the Democrats.

    • StilllHere

      Nobody believes Tom anymore, he’s a complete hack for Democrats.  He’s not a moderator in the traditional sense, more of a DNC talking point robot.

  • hennorama

    Each time I read “everyone should have skin in the game” or similar, I will simply repeat this post, which has yet to be answered:


    Let us assume that we all agree that “Everyone should pay something” when discussing Federal Income Tax (FIT), which seems to be the view that Mr. Romney and his camp, and you personally, are expressing.  Fine.  Everyone has to pay at least one dollar ($1.00) of FIT, annually.

    First, we need to define “everyone.”  Every person living in the US?  Every citizen?  Everyone over age 13, 18, 21?  Everyone under age 100?  Everyone who votes?  Everyone who drives?  Everyone who has income of any kind?

    OK, let’s assume this gets resolved somehow and we’ve defined “everyone.”

    Now let’s think about the incomes of “everyone.”

    What happens if I have no income?  I got injured while playing soccer, and can’t work the whole year.  Do I still have to pay the $1?

    What happens if I have income of $1.00, or $10, or $100 or $1000?  Do I still have to pay the $1?  Does the answer chnage if I have dependents?

    What if I run a business, the economy goes into a Great Recession, and I lose all my customers and have a loss?  Do I still have to pay the $1?

    What if I have no income, sell $10 million of stock at a loss?  I have $10 million in the bank now.  Do I still have to pay the $1?

    Do you see how things get a bit silly when you say “Everyone should pay something” ? “

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       OK, you’ve challenged me to respond.

      1) We’ve decided as a country to tax income at the individual level to fund our government.  Economically it might be better to switch to a consumption tax but there are fairness issues (to those on fixed incomes after paying in over a lifetime) in switching so let’s agree that we will stay with taxing income.

      2) Indigent — even if they have an income — shouldn’t have to pay.

      example: MA has a flat 5.3% tax but personal and dependent exemptions exclude the first $X from taxation.

      3) Selling stock at a loss isn’t income.  You are implying, if I understand it, that we should be taxing assets at the Federal level.

      3a) I’ll pose a corollary to your (3) example.  Muni bonds interest is NOT subject to federal taxation or taxation under the AMT rules.  Both Ross Perot and John Kerry’s wife payed almost no federal income tax on $millions in income because of that loophole.

      This example is sticking to income (not assets) but here you have some very wealthy not contributing.  Perhaps that loophole should be eliminated.  There is good reason for this loophole – helping lower the costs for local government — but I wonder the macro impact to changing the policy.

      So no, you didn’t convince me or make a good argument.  Historically, only the lowest 20% of earners didn’t contribute income taxes.  Now we are pushing 47%.
       

      • hennorama

        Thanks for your well written response.  I understand and respect your positions.  Clearly we don’t agree on everything, but I appreciate some back and forth rather than hyperbole alone.

        I also appreciate that you’ve conceded that there are exceptions to the ”everyone should pay something” argument.  Perhaps this “skin in the game” argument can now be discarded.

        It’s much more likely that both sides can agree on something more along the lines of “I think more Americans should pay some income tax.”  or even “Having 47% of Americans not paying income tax is too high.  Let’s figure out how to reduce this level.”

        Unfortunately, I failed to include part of my longer original post, which said my origianl post was a Reductio ad absurdum discussion.  My main point is that the “EVERYONE” argument is absurd due to its absolute nature.

        I appreciate that you have come away from this absolute view.

        I won’t comment on your point 1), as this is a MUCH bigger discussion

        Your point 2) “Indigent” leaves room for argument over the definition, but why quibble right now when you agree that NOT everyone “should have skin in the game.”

        I agree, the lowest income people should not have to pay FIT.

        As to your 3) – I tried multiple times to edit this to read “What if I have no [OTHER] income, sell $10 million of stock at a loss, [WHICH SHOWS UP AS A NEGATIVE FIGURE ON MY TAX RETURN] …”  Sorry about the CAPS, just pointing out my edits.

        Unfortunately, Disqus is having some issues and I was unable to do so.

        I was NOT saying anything about taxing assets.  Rather, my point was this was a LOSS, and a net loss for tax purposes.  Should people who have only losses still have to pay tax?  That was my point.

        Again, this was part of a Reductio ad absurdum discussion.

        Thanks again for your response.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           I got it.  Thanks.

          The reason for the ‘skin in the game’ argument is the old Ben Franklin line that goes something like: “once people realize they can vote for other peoples stuff democracy is over” .

          I agree with that admonition and we are near a dangerous tipping point.

          There are serious fairness issues with the payroll tax system and the way the entitlements are underfunded (per my comment above).  It is amazing what the voters let the politicians get away with.  Frankly, it’s fed by decades of young voter apathy.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=777610506 Jeffrey Schein

         Why anyone bothers to debate this right wing shill is beyond me. He is nothing but a FauxNews zombie full of hate and misinformation and false equivalencies.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       I responded directly to your question below.

      However, I believe you could have made a much stronger fairness case as follows.

      Everyone who has earned income contributes about 15% of their income in SS and medicare payroll taxes.  There are no exemptions.  The total amount collected was about the same as personal income tax until they ‘temporarily’ cut payroll taxes over the past two years.

      This is all well and good.  However, the government uses this money to fund ongoing government.  Because of age demographics the SS and Medicare systems are actuarially broken.  Since this system is generationally dishonest it benefits certain generations.

      Therefore, using payroll taxes to fund ongoing spending without a structural reform to the entitlement is inherently dishonest and unfair.

      • hennorama

        I was not making a fairness argument, but rather a Reductio ad absurdum point about using the word “everyone” in many posts in this forum.

        I do understand your point about the use of payroll taxes (which are something like 37% of total Federal revenue if memory serves).

        Of course, Mr. Romney was not talking about payroll taxes when discussing “the 47%.”

        Once again, I would caution you about using the word “everyone” as this makes your premise simply not true.

        First of all, EMPLOYEES currently pay 4.2% for SS tax and 1.45% for Medicare,  EMPLOYERS pay 6.2% SS tax and 4.15% for Medicare.  Combined, this is 13.3%.

        Self-employed people (after certain adjustments which I will leave out due to the added complexity) pay the combined rate of 13.3%

        However, there are limits for the amounts subject to SS tax.  For employees and employers, this limit for 2012 is $110,100.  Above this level, only Medicare tax is collected, and employees and employers each pay 1.45% each, for a combined 2.90%.

        It’s similar for self-employed people with net profit over the $110,100 SS tax limit.

        So, not “everyone” “contributes about 15%.”

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           OK. Understood.

          The politicians set this up as a self funding insurance system for retirement income and healthcare.  My only point is they are scamming us by both underfunding it — based on age demographics — and using the income stream to fund current spending.  And they are mostly scamming younger tax payers and probably because of the voter apathy of the younger voters.

          • JGC

            Too true.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Mother Jones says there is 2 minutes missing from their Romney tape in May– all 2 minutes are around the ‘controversial’ point.

    However, there are 4 hours missing in the tape from Obama’s $40K/plate fund raiser just last night.

    Move on folks.

     

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Obama is caught in a lie last night on Letterman.

    Ooops.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOVwCZ5TaPE&feature=youtu.be

     

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=777610506 Jeffrey Schein

       False equivalency. Typical of the classic FauxNews shill.

  • hennorama

    Romney’s “not elegantly stated” comments were idiotic.

    He conflates 2 different groups:

    - “the 47%” who pay no federal Income Tax (FIT), who he characterized as “dependent on government” and “entitled”- “the 47%” who “will vote for the President no matter what.”

    This leaves impressions, unintended or not, but certainly untrue and idiotic:

    1. All people who pay no FIT are lazy and believe the government “owes them a living”2. All people who pay no FIT support Pres. Obama

    So, therefore

    3. All people who support Pres. Obama are lazy and believe the government “owes them a living,” and all related corollaries

    Untrue and idiotic.

    This is like saying

    1.  1 in 7 Americans have 10 or more credit cards2.  1 in 7 Americans qualify for “food stamps” (BTW the official name of this program was changed to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) during the Bush II admin., so let’s use the official name, OK?)

    So, therefore

    3.  If you have 10 or more credit cards, you qualify for SNAP (“food stamps”), or vice versa.

    Untrue and idiotic.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Where are the missing two minutes?
      Maybe that puts some context into the remarks about political process at a fundraiser.

      Ya think?
       

      • hennorama

        Yes, maybe.  Yes, let’s solve this conspiracy to have Mr. Romney hang himself with his own words.  YES!  WHERE ARE THE 2 MINUTES?!!

        Let’s try to imagine SOME remarks that could put some context into his remarks, maybe put them in a better light:

        “You know, I just found out someone is taping this.  I’m gonna put on a little show.  I’ll say some stupid stuff that I don’t believe for the benefit of the tape, OK?  I mean, I know you all paid $50K to be here, so you do expect some entertainment, right?  I mean, the stuff I’m about to say is NOT intended to convince you guys to give me more money or anything, OK?  I don’t really believe this obviously untrue and idiotic stuff, so just bear with me for a bit, OK?

        Yeah, I’m sure you could find SOMETHING to put the crass comments Romney made into a better context.

        Good luck with that.

        • Steve__T

           The person tapeing  this did not want to be identified, and may be in that two min.

  • WorriedfortheCountry
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=777610506 Jeffrey Schein

       Obama didn’t waive any work requirements. You are a pathetic right wing song and dance man.

  • gonkers

     Sorry G, but from your posts tax rates ARE everything.

  • gonkers

    Sorry G, but from your posts tax rates ARE everything.

  • gonkers

     Disqus continues to be whacked out. This was a RESPONSE to a post below. It ended up here. And I’ve been unable to EDIT some posts getting either SYSTEM ERROR pop-ups or SOMETHING WENT WRONG.

  • Pingback: Romney Goes Off On Obama Voters - Page 5

  • gonkers

    According to Table 1.1 of the US Historical Budget Tables ON-BUDGET revenues for FY09 were

    $1,450.980 billion. 

    and expenses were

    3,000.661 billion leaving a 

    -1,549.681 deficit

    We were BORROWING from future taxpayers about 52% of all that was spent in FY2009. In FY2010 that was about 47%.

    Yet some of our right wing friends here have the gall to claim THEY are paying for others.

    In reality it was our kids and grandkids who were paying most of our bills… and they will have to pay the debt run up because of irresponsible TAX CUTS.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      The tax cuts for that period represent <$300B so you only get partial credit for your rant.

      And that includes the estate of George Steinbrenner who just happened to die at exactly the right time.

      • gonkers

        Empty claim. Tax cuts cost $300 billion less than WHAT? What’s your source?

        You’re evading the main point for a side show. People here complain that there’s some major confiscation of wealth from the rich to pay for benefits for others. The numbers show we’re confiscating wealth FROM OUR KIDS AND GRANDKIDS… and that also includes paying for tax cuts FOR the rich, tax cuts WE COULD NOT AFFORD.

        Try dealing with that issue.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           My only point is that the Bush tax cuts are a minority part of the deficit.  I’ll grant yo u it is still significant.

          I believe the last CBO estimate I saw was the Bush tax cuts would account for $400B in 2014.  The reason it was less in 2009 was tax revenues were way down.

          The total personal income tax revenues in 2011 were $1.1T.

          I’ll grant you we have a revenue problem.  We also have a massive spending problem.  However, the bigger problem is the lack of economic growth and jobs.

          IF we can raise revenue and cut spending while growing the economy I am all for it.

          I suspect there is significant spending (ie -waste) that can be cut without hurting the economy.  Regarding taxes, we need reform more than increase in rates.  IF we had true reform and also raised a bit more revenue that would be OK.

          The bottom line is Obama’s plan to restore the top rate to pre-Bush would only raise one weeks worth of deficit spending next year and cost 700K jobs.  Sounds like a poor tradeoff and frankly crassly political in an election year.

          • gonkers

            AGAIN, you’re evading the issue I raised. I was merely responding to outrageous posts like this:


            “I’m saying the 47% need to STFU and show some appreciation for those pulling the weight.”

            The people pulling the weight are not today’s rich. It’s our kids and grandkids… and THEY are also paying for those tax cuts for the rich.

          • Gregg Smith

            I think more revenue would just mean more spending. 

            With all due respect to the CBO, they project in a vacuum. It’s impossible to say what revenue would have been in 2014 if the Bush tax cuts had not happened. The CBO assumes many parameters like GDP , unemployment rate etc. and does not factor the unknown. For instance they projected (based on Clinton’s own budget) $200 billion deficits as far as the eye can see before the ’94 Republican takeover. They didn’t factor “the Contract with America” and welfare reform, balanced budgets and the rest. They also didn’t factor the huge influence of the growing or bursting tech and housing bubbles. They did not factor 9/11. Don’t get me wrong, they can’t know these things but the context of their assumptions is clear.

            So imagine if you will the Bush tax cuts were gone. Suddenly the 10% rate would be 15%; the 25% rate to 28%; the 28% to 31%’ the 33% to 36% and the 35% to 39.6%. Married couples would see there Standard deduction go down. Millions of people would not receive the EITC. I can’t prove it but IMO that would be a disaster in this economy. I do not believe for a minute it would bring in an extra $400B in revenue. There are not the jobs to support it.

            My liberal friends (and ultrax) like to tell me I think tax cuts are always good and hikes never good but that’s not true. Clinton did fine raising taxes in peacetime with a bubbling economy. We are in the Obama economy now. A tax hike may be prudent to raise revenue in the future but not now. I will admit ending the Bush cuts would put 6 million of the poorest back in the game and that would help. It would also help revenue by ending Bush’s expansion of the EITC (as will happen Jan.1) But taking away that check and making them pay taxes now won’t work because they are out of work. It would cause great suffering. 

            Remember I am referring to the CBO report’s assumption which projects revenue assuming ALL the Bush tax cuts did not happen.

            I prefer Romney’s approach much better as I’m sure you do. That will cause growth which will create tax payers which will create revenue.

          • gonkers

            You’re evading the issue.

            You’ve repeatedly claimed here something to the effect you were paying taxes to support deadbeats. That’s pretty evident in your post

            “I’m saying the 47% need to STFU and show some appreciation for those pulling the weight.”

            I’m merely pointing out your claim is baseless. It’s future taxpayers that are pulling the weight AND paying for YOUR tax cuts. So seems everyone’s a deadbeat. Even Romney.

            None the less, I also expect you to keep repeating your false claim.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Gregg we are on the same page.  I was responding to the Bush tax cuts causing the deficit and I take your point of static and dynamic analysis. I was being overly generous by using static numbers to point out the deficit blame lies mostly elsewhere–spending.

            Economists are calling the status quo -the fiscal cliff.  Restoration of all tax cuts with massive across the board cuts in spending starting Jan 1.

            What kills me is there is no talk of cutting spending because it would hurt the economy.  BS.  There is stimulative spending and wasteful spending.

            Without a budget there is no way to prioritize the spending.  It is fairly clear Obama had no budget so he could lock in the 25% of GDP spending until ….

          • gonkers

            You want to have your cake and eat it. You can CLAIM you favored the occasional tax hike during peace time, but you also favored the Bush tax CUT when it was passed in the summer of 2001… BEFORE 911, when there was 6 TRILLION in debt, and Bush PROMISED to pay down that debt during his 2000 run. That was “peace time”.

            Did Bush hold off on his tax cuts to see if they’d interfere with debt paydown? OF COURSE NOT.

            Yes, we should not trust CBO projections… and Bush should not have counted his chickens before they were hatched.

            If Bush HONESTLY wanted to pay down debt, he’d put the tax cuts off just to be on the safe side.

            He had a second chance to prove he wanted to pay down debt when deficits rose. He could have called for the repeal of those tax cuts. He did not. Why? Because Bush never did want to pay down debt.

            So what was his REAL agenda? It was to create MORE debt… to starve the beast… to undermine Social Security and scare the public so it could be privatized.

            That ploy didn’t work, but his sabotaging of the US Treasury certainly did. See my post above on how in constant dollars income tax revenues NEVER exceeded Clinton’s last year in all of Bush’s eight years. 

             

  • Potter

    I don’t know how anyone can find equivalence between what Obama said (in the last election season) and what Romney said.

    Obama was talking about frustrations of people who cannot find a job and who turn sour, blame others, feel comfort in their guns  and/or turn to their faiths.

    How does that compare to the level of disdain and unconcern (willingness to write off, exclude) in  Romney’s statement? 

    We hear this comparison everywhere now as though thinking about the different sentiment behind each does not matter simply because an equivalence is desperately needed.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Remember Romney was talking about voters and not about how he would govern.  He admits it was inartful and we don’t know the context he set in the missing two minutes of tape — conveniently erased.

      He wasn’t trying to divide voters but was relaying the reality that this will be a 47 – 47 race and the two campaigns will be fighting over the other 6%.

      The truth is Obama and Axelrod have been trying to divide voters this entire campaign.  Tax the rich -to no benefit(1 week of deficit spending vs. loss of 700K jobs). War on women –no one has ever been denied contraception.  Pander to illegal immigrants.   Race — put you back in chains.  Block the oil pipeline – green vs. mainstreet.  Pander to youth vote — low interest loan extension after taking over the college loan industry.  On and and on.

      • Potter

        I disagree with all your claims here but did you read this?

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-belkin/romneys-greatest-deceptio_b_1895669.html

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Seriously?

          The great deception is the Julia cartoon where the government coddles you from cradle to grave.

          I honestly believe almost everything Obama has done over the last two years as been crass divide and conquer politics.  All small ball political stuff while our economy was suffering.

          If he had pushed Simpson-Bowles for a vote I would have a different view.

          • Potter

            so you did not bother to read it…

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            I skimmed it.  The problem is the article is about policy vs. Romney talking political process.

            And the bit on housing seems to favor Romney since he will eliminate the home mortgage deductions for the wealthy.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=777610506 Jeffrey Schein

             I just want to know one thing. How furiously do you jerk off while watching FauxNews?

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=777610506 Jeffrey Schein

         What a shameless right wing shill you are.

  • Gregg Smith

    Apologies to the blog, I have engaged Ultrax. I just now figured out he is Gonkers. He must have been banned again. 

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      —-

    • gonkers

      Gregg, haven’t YOU been banned numerous times? Do you deny in August 2011 YOU wrote:

      How can you be banned three times in a day? I get
      banned for weeks at a time. I can change my email and moniker and it works a
      little while then nothing works. I then comment from my studio computer which
      has a different IP address. When I’m banned there I switch names again until
      that doesn’t work. Then I go to my neighbors house. By the time I’m banned there
      the first computer works again and I start over.

      Edited because I misread G’s post. My apologies to G.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Ideally no one should be banned unless their behavior is egregious.

        Everything I saw from you today was A-OK.

        We just disagree and that is A-OK too. And we didn’t even disagree on everything.

        • Steve__T

           That’s being a true gentlemen kudos

      • Gregg Smith

        It was a glitch inflicted on everyone and it was fixed long long ago. WBUR apologized to everyone at the top of the page. I have not been banned since and the only one I know who has is you. I would guess it’s your disruptiveness and inability to move past Clinton or Bush. 

        You wrote: “And yet here you are demanding others be banned?”

        BS. I have never, am not and will never call for anyones banning but you just did. I want you here for all to see.

        It is soooo creepy that you keep a file on me. I’m in your head.

        • gonkers

          Please stick to the issues Greggg.

          BTW there was no apology. It was removed shorty after it was posted. But maybe it woke someone up to the rampant banning.

          • Gregg Smith

            There certainly was an apology. Look it up.

          • gonkers

            Please stick to the issues Gregg. 

        • gonkers

          Plausible deniablity. Your post was a roundabout call for someone to be banned. You were hoping Mods would see it. Who knows how many post you flag. 

          • Gregg Smith

            I rarely ever flag anyone. I have in the past for extreme perversion or violent threatening rants but that’s it. I’m a first amendment guy. I have never called for anyone to be banned. On my own blog I had many many commenters trying to get me to ban idiots but I won’t do it.

    • gonkers

      I think the REAL problem here is you want to make outrageous and inaccurate statements like

      “I’m saying the 47% need to STFU and show some appreciation for those pulling the weight.”

      And you don’t want anyone to decisively rebut your claim as I did below.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    President doesn’t remember the size of the debt while talking to Letterman.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6D55384wiUg&feature=youtu.be
     

    Very embarrassing and much worse the 57 states or corpsmen. This should be at the tip of his tongue at all times.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=777610506 Jeffrey Schein

       He didn’t say he didn’t remember the size of the debt, dimwit. He said he didn’t remember the exact numbers scrolling by on the “debt meter” prop at the RNC.  Neither does anyone who didn’t bother to watch the RNC hate-fest.

      • Gregg Smith

        $16 trillion, everybody knows it.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         RNC hatefest?

        I watched much of both conventions and the DNC was much more a hatefest.

        Now for something really important. Everyone needs to study this and understand the implications.

        http://www.usdebtclock.org/

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Since the $16T milestone was reached during his convention he should have been VERY aware.

        Especially since he had his faux outrage against Bush’s debt in 2008 when he called Bush unpatriotic for running up less debt in 8 years than Obama’s run up in less than 4 years.

        • gonkers

          Bush’s debt was self-inflicted. After running on debt paydown, even promising it again during his first State Of The Union, Bush cut taxes in 2001 when we were 6 TRILLION in debt… ending any possibility of debt paydown.

          Obama inherited Bush’s collapsing economy.

          See the difference?

          Didn’t think so. 

  • Potter

    from USA Today article 2008 “Clinton Plays up “bitter” quote.

    At issue are comments Obama made privately at a fundraiser in San Francisco a week ago. He was trying to explain his troubles winning over some working-class voters, saying they have become frustrated with economic conditions:

    “It’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or anti-pathy to people who aren’t like them, or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

    …………..Earlier Saturday, speaking in Muncie, Indiana, Obama said there had been a “political flare-up because I said something that everybody knows is true, which is that there are a whole bunch of folks in small towns in Pennsylvania, in towns right here in Indiana, in my hometown in Illinois, who are bitter. They are angry. They feel like they have been left behind. They feel like nobody is paying attention to what they’re going through.”

  • TomK_in_Boston
  • gonkers

    Post pulled. Double checking my numbers…

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Let’s look at the absolute numbers.

       From BEA:

      US GDP
      2008 – $14.291T
      2009 – $13,973T
      2010 – $14,498T
      2011 – $15,075T

      Now make your math work.

      • gonkers

        Pulled my post because my source used annualized GDP on a quarterly basis while I was using Q/Q changes.

      • gonkers

        In terms of real (inflation corrected) GDP the 2008 Q2 level was not reached again until 2011 Q3.

        http://bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=9&step=1

        Which is close to what I said it would take. My point being the Obama Stimulus stemmed the collapse in the economy, but it wasn’t enough to fill the giant hole in GDP made by irresponsible right wing policies. And Bush’s $5 trillion in new debt made it more difficult for the government to respond to this emergency.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Please explain ‘recovery summer’ and the reversal ever since because there have been no additional ‘right wing policies’.  It has been ALL Obama, including the slow and steady implementation job killing aspects of both Obamacare and Dodd-Frank.

          Probably most damaging is his anti-business rhetoric and recalcitrance to push for passage of Dodd-Frank tax reform to give some certainty to the markets.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=777610506 Jeffrey Schein

             Job killing aspects of Obamacare? That’s a right wing myth.

            Anti-business rhetoric? Another right wing myth.

            Keep drooling over FauxNews, Con.

          • Gregg Smith
          • gonkers

            ObamaCare is corporate welfare for health insurance companies as Medicare was a big wet kiss to Big Pharma. This is why the GOP proposed it back in the 90′s when 80% of the GOP senators signed on as co-sponsors for bills with individual mandates.

          • gonkers

            Right wing policies left over from Clinton and Bush are in effect until repealed, replaced or they expire. The irresponsible Bush tax cuts were to expire but were foolishly extended. Dodd-Frank wasn’t passed until July 2010 and even now isn’t fully implemented. Even then it doesn’t fully reverse the repeal of Glass Steagall, or reverse the onerous aspects of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. NAFTA nor WTO have been touched. The idea that NO left over right wing policies are still in effect is laughable. But I do appreciate such simplistic thinking. It’s the same logic used to credit Newt with Clinton’s Surplus when Newt actually OPPOSED the 1993 tax hikes which made the Surplus possible.

              

      • Gregg Smith

        It’s a roller coaster and worse when you look at GDP in terms of growth. Q1 of 2011 was 0.1%. By Q4 it was 4.1% but now (Q2,2012) it’s 1.7%. The trend is all wrong.

  • hennorama

    Mr. Romney was speaking in Boca Raton, which is loosely/commonly translated as “Rat’s Mouth”

    This just came to me for some reason, and I laughed and laughed …

  • Outside_of_the_Box

    We fall into a trance with each new election cycle. This candiadate or that candidate. We forget about the past. And get caught up in the charade. This is the illusion of demoracy in the US. The fact is, it doesn’t matter which candidate, which party, wins. Not on the big ticket items. Because the country is run by special interests, and they are happy to work with either. Why? The candidates are highly vetted to make sure they are “on board” with the charade. The candidates also owe their wins to those very special interests. So it’s completely rigged. All the President has to do is give the impression of a democratic system. While the special interests go about their business as usual. Wars, subsidies and aid, bailouts, war machine, etc; The job of politicians, MSM, academics, think tanks, etc, is to maintain the illusion of democracy. So that the special interests can do their thing behind the scenes with minimal interference.

    • Outside_of_the_Box

      Think about it. Tell me I’m wrong. But tell me why if you do.

      • gonkers

        I suspect you’re missing the larger picture… the inherent dysfunctionality of our system.

        Democracy is supposed to be a system where government derives its JUST powers from the CONSENT of the governed. Elections are the tool to measure that consent.

        Our system is simply incapable of measuring that consent. It forces voters into a two party choice where voters can vote their conscience for a third party but in doing so can split the majority and throw the election to some minority candidate as happened in 2000.

        It’s this dynamic that is the ideological “enforcer” that jams us all into a intellectually braindead two party system… one so dysfunctional that in off-year elections barely 35% of the voting age population even votes.

  • jirenma

    How about the 53%? In the past forty years, how many of the living and voting 53% were – at any point in their lives – on state funded healthcare, assistance programs or welfare? 

    • gonkers

      Good point. Romney is so consumed by his own silver spoon fairytale he is clueless what he’s saying or who he’s insulting. He’s conflated not paying federal income tax with dependency when it’s the GOP that has been taking millions of workers off the tax rolls hoping to “starve the beast”. Then the GOP cynically uses this to claim the poor aren’t paying enough, and the tax code is unfair to the rich. Their “solution” is to tax the poor and push for more tax cuts for the rich.  

    • hennorama

      The Daily Show segment last night, showing old video of Mitt’s mother Lenore talking about Mitt’s father George Romney having been on welfare, was priceless.  You can see it here, starting about 4:35 into the segment:

      http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-september-18-2012/the-millionaire-gaffemaker

      NPR has the video of Lenore Romney here, too:

      http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/09/19/161409916/welfare-wasnt-always-a-dirty-word-in-the-romney-family

      • gonkers

         ROTF! Thanks for that. By Mitt’s definition, his own dad would never vote for him.

      • JGC

        Thanks for this.  I had no idea about this video, and it surely puts the whole picture into better context. 

  • gonkers

    The Right claims tax cuts, especially for the wealthy, create revenue booms. Some claim they’ll bring in so much more revenue they’ll pay for themselves. Romney/Ryan are again proposing the Right Big Lie that never dies. The Right lies about these numbers all the time… usually counting revenue from tax HIKES, and even counting revenues from other presidents.
    Here’s how well it worked the last time these tax cuts were tried.

    Here’s a look at Bush income tax revenues compared to Clinton’s last year (FY00) correcting for inflation. Numbers are from Table 2.1—RECEIPTS BY SOURCE of the US Historical Budget Tables. This is just a look at revenue NOT SPENDING OR DEFICITS.

    Since this source does NOT correct for inflation in this chart, I used the inflation calculator at http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm to convert to constant 2005 dollars in billions.

    Using constant 2005 dollars means revenue from years before the target year will inflate in value, those after will deflate. Column one is the fiscal year. Column 2 is income tax revenue in CURRENT dollars collected that year. Column 3 is revenue in billions of 2005 CONSTANT dollars. It could be argued that FY01 is Clinton’s last year since the fiscal year began when Clinton was still in office. But Bush’s 2001 EGGTRA tax cut was retroactive to Jan 1, 2001.

    2000 1004.462 = 1139.206 Clinton’s last year.

    2001 994.339 = 1096.524

    2002 858.345 = 931.822

    2003 793.699 = 842.442

    2004 808.959 = 836.370

    2005 927.222 = 927.222

    2006 1043.908 = 1011.285

    2007 1163.472 = 1095.899

    2008 1145.747 = 1039.299

    If my math is correct, what we see is that even after eight years, at the end of Bush’s term income tax rates were cut so irresponsibly those income tax revenues NEVER AGAIN EXCEEDED CLINTON’S LAST YEAR.

    I’m sure some readers will see 8 years of declining income tax revenues as “proof” tax cuts create revenue booms.
    But then some people will believe anything.

    • Gregg Smith

      What a piece of work you are. Tax cuts can stimulate the economy creating more revenue as happened under Bush. No idiot I know says cutting income tax creates more revenue from income tax. It’s the economy stupid.

      So you milk the numbers, make up you own column, reframe the argument, ramble on about fantasy claims of “proof” and dwell on past history as our present condition crumbles. Are you ever embarrassed for yourself?

      When the tax rates were lowered in 2003 the unemployment rate went don for 52 months and revenue increased by over a half trillion dollars by 2007. It’s still true.

    • Gregg Smith

      What a piece of work you are. Tax cuts can stimulate the economy creating more revenue as happened under Bush. No idiot I know says cutting income tax creates more revenue from income tax. It’s the economy stupid.

      So you milk the numbers, make up you own column, reframe the argument, ramble on about fantasy claims of “proof” and dwell on past history as our present condition crumbles. Are you ever embarrassed for yourself?

      When the tax rates were lowered in 2003 the unemployment rate went don for 52 months and revenue increased by over a half trillion dollars by 2007. It’s still true.

      • gonkers

        WHERE’S THE GROWTH IN INCOME TAX REVENUE???? If this were such as slam dunk for your claims, you’d not be glossing over the numbers. Even in Bush’s BEST year, his revenue’s compared to Clinton’s last year were pathetic… and that was after SIX YEARS of lower revenue.

        FACT: Revenue tends to grow on it’s own from inflation and growth in the work force. Showing growth is no sign of a successful tax policy. As I’ve said a hundred times to deaf ears, what tax cuts do IS REDUCE REVENUES. That does NOT MEAN FOREVER. It’s usually sets the revenue growth curve back 3-5-6 years.

        And OF COURSE The Right sells tax cuts as a magic money free lunch. This was what Bush1 exposed as Voodoo Economics. Reagan claimed he could cut taxes, increase defense spending, and balance the budget with all that extra revenue in 4 years.

        And here’s Rush on tax cuts:

        “If it brings in, say, two dollars for every dollar of tax relief, we’ll have
        more money in the treasury – and thus safeguard programs like Social Security!
        The idea behind tax cuts is to get the economy to grow. The economy is not
        static. The pie is not one size forever, with no new slices. The object is to
        grow so we have more people working and paying taxes. Presidents Kennedy and
        Reagan proved this with their tax cuts. The Democratic Congress spent every new
        dollar and more that Reagan brought in, but the fact is that the revenue coming
        into the treasury nearly doubled over his two terms.”

        In reality… including Reagan’s tax hikes, in real dollars revenues only went up about 13% in eight years.

        As Laffer said, if tax rates are too LOW, they will FAIL to bring in optimum revenue.

        • Gregg Smith

          Alrighty then.

          • gonkers

            Thanks for finally conceding the obvious that the Right has been lying about tax cuts bringing in more revenue. 

          • Gregg Smith

            When the tax rates were lowered in 2003 the unemployment rate went down for 52 months and revenue increased by over a half trillion dollars by 2007. It’s still true.

        • gonkers

           For the record, the propagandists on the Right include revenue from 3 tax HIKES made between 66 and 69 as their “proof” the so-called JFK tax cuts produced more revenue. They pulled the same stunt with Reagan revenues including revenue from two massive tax hikes in 82 and 83 as “proof” there was a revenue boom. Of course there was none. To explain that Rush simply lies when he blames the Democrats.

  • alloren

    Remember when Eastwood was talking to the empty chair and said ” I can’t tell Romney to do that to himself”? I think I understand what the chair said and I agree.

  • TomK_in_Boston

    This incident has been great!

    We get to see the real Etchasketch, comfortable with his fellow oligarchs, saying how he really feels about the citizens. With no spin doctor, the boss who tells you to clean out your cubicle, he’s shipped your job to china, is clearly visible. 

    We get to see Etchasketch berating the 47% for benefiting from Bush’s expansion of the child tax credit and from the earned income credit, which used to be a GoP (Reagan) favorite. Bizarro. 

    We get to see an oligarch who pays a 13% tax rate, in the only year he will show us, complaining about those with nothing not paying enough. Nice!

    We can even consider that Etchasketch, some years, was a member of the 47%!!

    Don’t forget also, he said he “inherited nothing” from CEO-governor daddy, did it all himself. Isn’t it disgusting when the privileged won’t acknowledge what a head start they had?

    And the best, of course, he lost the election. Maybe more voters will wake up to the evil nature of the current TeaOP.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       See you in November.  This is going to be fun.

      Don’t worry the Pew poll today had Obama +8.  You can sleep well.

      However don’t look at who Pew decided to sample: 48% were  2008 Obama voters and 32% were 2008 McCain voters.

      • jefe68

        And yet Obama won.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Huh?  He didn’t win anything.

          Do you believe the electorate will have that composition on November 6th?

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Is anyone disturbed that the Romney tape was edited?

    Mother Jones admits there is missing 1-2 minutes around the controversial statements and they either won’t release it or claim they don’t have it.

    Seems like the media has a double standard.

    • jefe68

      You really are desperate posting this.
      Romney said what he said, period.

      The question one should be asking is how someone who has used his so called great managerial as a positive be so lousy at managing a presidential campaign. It’s really pathetic how bad this campaign is being run.
      Mitt Romney’s only hope now is he does well enough in the debates and the economy, which is not going to be a good spin for president Obama.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Hey, we agree.

        Romney could have run a better campaign but it has nothing to do with his comments at a private fund raiser in May.

        In fact, this puts him in the spotlight with a winning message.  Let’s see what he does with it.

        I can’t wait until the polls come out next week with the race back to where it was before the convention — dead heat -  and watch Wolf Blitzer’s and David Gergen’s head explode.

    • hennorama

      I really don’t like repeating myself, but at times I feel it’s warranted:

      “Yes, maybe.  Yes, let’s solve this conspiracy to have Mr. Romney hang himself with his own words.  YES!  WHERE ARE THE 2 MINUTES?!!
      Let’s try to imagine SOME remarks that could put some context into his remarks, maybe put them in a better light:”You know, I just found out someone is taping this.  I’m gonna put on a little show.  I’ll say some stupid stuff that I don’t believe for the benefit of the tape, OK?  I mean, I know you all paid $50K to be here, so you do expect some entertainment, right?  I mean, the stuff I’m about to say is NOT intended to convince you guys to give me more money or anything, OK?  I don’t really believe this obviously untrue and idiotic stuff, so just bear with me for a bit, OK?Yeah, I’m sure you could find SOMETHING to put the crass comments Romney made into a better context.Good luck with that.”

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Hey, it turns out Romney was out front being critical of the embassy for apologizing for a stupid video.

     Despite the Obama administration doubling down on video for a full week we now find out the video was simply a pretext for a pre-planned attack by terrorists.  Further, the terrorist leader may have been released from Gitmo in 2007.

    • jefe68

      Oh boy are you desperate or what.  Romney is running and awful campaign. Even Peggy Noonan thinks he’s going to lose.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         No, I’m just enjoying watching the media clowns eating crow.

        It is the only thing to salvage in this horrible situation.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         No Peggy doesn’t think he will lose and it turns out she was wrong on the embassy issue.  I read her piece and she is giving messaging advice to break through the fog of the media.

  • TomK_in_Boston

    Hey, did you see the RR boys new medicare ad:

    ““Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan get it. Medicare is going broke,” Rubio says in the ad. “That’s not politics. It’s math. Anyone who wants to leave Medicare like it is, is for letting it go bankrupt. My mother’s 81 and depends on Medicare.”

    “We can save Medicare without changing hers,” he continues. “But only if younger Americans accept that our Medicare will be different than our parents,’ when we retire in 30 years. But after all they did for us, isn’t that the least we can do?””

    Wow, they sure do stick to SOP. First the deficit scare “Program XYZ is going broke”, then they stick it to the middle class. “the least we can do”, LOL. What is the least the romney types could do? How about paying 50% instead  of 13% and sending the $ to medicare??? That would be nice.

    If anyone still has trouble translating voodoo into English, let me help. The above quote says “You’re getting a voucher.”

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Premium support is an OPTION.

      Are you against choice?

      • TomK_in_Boston

        Wow. Pass the Kool-Aid.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           OK.

          When is choice bad?  The competition model for Medicare part D actually drove costs down and we need that badly.

          • TomK_in_Boston

            Wow! The “choice” scam, swallowed whole. I’ll tell you when choice is bad: when your “choices” all cost a lot more than what you’re getting now.

            FYI: the voucher won’t cover costs, it’s a cost shift onto seniors. The option to keep traditional medicare is spin to confuse the voters, since the most healthy seniors will opt out and undermine the pool, leading to the destruction of traditional medicare, the real agenda.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Hey Tom, if seniors don’t like the voucher — which is the same as every employer and government insurance policy — they can still choose the current system.

            The status quo is going bankrupt and will hurt ALL seniors and everyone else.  Remember our unfunded liability is $120T for all entitlements.

            Also, there are many other issues with the status quo — like an implicit rationing of services because the government underpays for primary care Medicare services.  I have relatives on waiting lists waiting for patients to DIE before they can get in to see a Dr.

            In my view, the only reason anyone would be against this program is if they believe they would be giving up an election wedge issue.  When you have  Democrats like Alice Rivlin (from Clinton’s admin) and liberal Senator Ron Wyden promoting this it can’t be a subversive GOP plot as you claim.  The irony is the wedge issue will disappear with the status quo because the system is about to collapse.

          • gonkers

            The health care needs of seniors are vastly different than those in their working years.

            Ryan’s plan “saves” the government money not through some magical efficiency of the private sector, but by shifting costs to seniors. With all their preexisting conditions, health care vouchers simply won’t be sufficient for companies to make a profit without high deductibles.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             No.  No. No.

            The REFORM bends the cost curve down for all.  I guess you disagree with Alice Rivlin and Ron Wyden.

          • gonkers

            The experience of Single Payer systems proves otherwise.

          • gonkers

            Drove prices down compared to what? There’s perhaps no more EXPENSIVE way to develop drugs than how it’s done in the US.

            The CBO reported in “Promotional Spending for Prescription Drugs” that in 2008 Big Pharma wasted 20.5 billion just on promotion and only 38 billion on actual R&D. That doesn’t even include other costs such as profits, high CEO pay, etc. How  much of that R&D money was wasted on “me-too” drugs is another matter.

            I fail to see these magical efficiencies you claim the private sector has a monopoly on.

      • gonkers

        Choice is GOP code language for using government’s power to tax to hand Medicare over to the parasites in the health insurance industry who contribute nothing but take a cut. Same with “choice” for Social Security… the GOP’s ploy to hand SS monies to the sociopathic predators on Wall Street.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Increasing competition in the health insurance industry will make them work harder — much harder for their profits.

          Who benefits? — the taxpayer AND the patients.

          • gonkers

            “Profit” is just money diverted AWAY from providing actual health care. There’s a high competitive overhead inherent in not having Single Payer… advertising, high CEO pay, companies having their own rules which increases billing costs, and profits.

            These health insurance companies are parasites sucking resources AWAY from actual care.  

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             CT scans and MRI technology and new drugs would never have been developed without a profit motive.

            Please get a clue.

            Your utopian fantasy world doesn’t exist — never has, never will.

          • gonkers

            I never said I was against profit, did I? I LOVE profit. I agree it’s a great motivator.

            But not all profit seeking behavior is PRODUCTIVE. Much of it is inefficient and even parasitic.

            See the difference?

            Didn’t think so.

          • gonkers

            Reagan left the development of AM-stereo radio to the market to decide which system to us. Predictably the effort FAILED. Neither consumers nor broadcasters wanted to invest in the market losers so they didn’t invest.

            Sometimes to make capitalism efficient it needs to be guided away from its self-destructive and inefficient behaviors. 

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            I want to buy a 100 W incandescent light bulb for my niece’s EZ bake oven and I can’t.

            Thanks.
             

          • gonkers

            I feel her pain. Progress can be so cruel.

          • TinaWrites

            Our local Blue Cross built a gigantic new building in our downtown.  Rates keep going up.  There was plenty of space to add on to their original site just about a quarter mile away.  So, don’t forget about the money these corporations spend on real estate construction, probably for the purpose of real estate “investment”!!!!  And the rates keep going up!

    • Gregg Smith

      Obama’s HHS in forcing 2 million of the poorest most vulnerable elderly out of Medicare and into a voucher program. It happened the day after Obama’s convention speech where he condemned the idea. Are you aware of this? Your outrage is misplaced.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Gregg, democrats don’t engage in hypocrisy.  Just ask them.

        • Gregg Smith

          How true. They aren’t very informed either.

          • Steve__T

            How informed on this are you
             A Taste of the Romney Economy: Workers at Bain-Owned Factory Fight Outsourcing to China

            And how hypocritical is Romney?

          • Gregg Smith

            No outsourcing occurred whole Romney was at Bain. Obama is outsourcer in chief.

          • Steve__T

            You are so deluded, I think … is your real name Romney?

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Romney left Bain in 1999.

            Obama is outsourcing US jobs to Spain to count US votes in 2012.

            But keep digging, you are getting toward the bottom of the barrel.

          • gonkers

            No, Romney SAYS he left Bain in 99.

            See the difference?

            Didn’t think so.

            Objective people realize they don’t know what happened. Partisans just repeat whatever helps their cause.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Look in the mirror.  He must have been really good because he was able to run a major firm AND save the Olympics simultaneously.

            Can I vote for him twice?

          • gonkers

             The only way he managed to run the Olympics was with some $1.2 – 1.5 billion dollar bailout from the Feds.

          • Steve__T

             Fail

          • Steve__T

             Fail

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Uh oh.

    Today’s Gallup daily tracking O47 R47. Post ‘edited’ 47% comments and asymmetric media coverage.

    Wait.  The liberal media told us this was over. Their collective head is going to explode.   3…2…1…

    Maybe another visit with Letterman will help.  Maybe this time he’ll know the size of the debt.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Oh no.

    Obama claims the lack of Bush regulations drove us into the ditch — without any evidence of direct causation.  None.

    However, we find out that NEW Obama regulations will cost the US economy $1.8T annually — 20 times the estimate.  No wonder the economy is stuck in the doldrums with no growth.

    We need to fire Obama ASAP and get this economy growing again.

     http://washingtonexaminer.com/1.8-trillion-shock-obama-regs-cost-20-times-estimate/article/2508466#.UFs_11GvN8G

    • gonkers

      You’re AGAIN passing off opinion and in this case corporate propaganda, as news stories.

    • Gregg Smith

      I saw that earlier. I’m not surprised. Obamacare is a ball and chain on the economy.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Yeah, but it is way more than Obamacare.  EPA by itself was over $350B.

  • 77yroldhasbeen78

    WE have always paid income taxes, and we now get SS (via RR roll in) and Medicare since we are age 77 & 78. I guess by Mitt’s standards we are the scum of the earth. At this age I still work, 2 part time jobs to get by. I still pay SS which is rolled into RR, and part of my wages are held back as an annunity for working for same employer. I suffer 7 major medical problems, had cancer back in 1991; were I to re-get cancer today, under Obama, I could get Medicare coverage (that wasn’t available in 1991) Thanks to the “Affordable Care” act passed under Obama. NO WAY would I vote for “Mitt”!

    To make a telling contract between Mitt’s place in the economic world and mine: He is a billionaire; We don’t even have any savings left after the recessions of the ’60s, 70′s, and 80′s, then the newest one caused by Geo. W. Bush and the Republicans! The main job I work at I began in 1987 – 25 yrs. ago, starting at minimum wage, my work place only gave all of us raises of 25cents an hour per year, so it has taken me 25 years to work up to a little over $11.00 an hour. But the big rub is, in this recession our hours were cut and we can only get limited ones, of 20 hours a week. No benies either. Thus I get about $400 a month unless I’m sick, which w/my many problems and age, I don’t make that much when some of them, like Fibromyalga, flare up. I was out of commision several times this year.

    I’m turning Dem this year & will NEVER be a Rep. again! I am so disgusted w/them! A law should be passed that if you habitually stale mate as a Congressman, YOU don’t get paid.

    And, Mitt? As long as HE won’t release at least 10 years of income tas returns, than WHY should ANYONE VOTE FOR HIM? WHAT’S HE HIDING???

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Tax returns?  Romney released the same number as McCain and Reagan.  The tax returns are an Axelrod distraction and don’t inform voters on any important issue.  We already know he is rich. We also know he could have been a billionaire if he didn’t leave his job and go into public service to save the state of MA and the Olympics.

      You are mis- characterizing Romney’s position.  He wants to help everyone by growing the economy and having that economy create private sector jobs.  New private sector jobs is the only way to balance the budget and protect the precious entitlements that you count on.

      Further, the precious entitlements that you count on are underfunded to the tune of $120T so they need bipartisan, common sense reforms to strengthen them for our younger citizens and their children.  The underfunding is staggering — it is over $1M per current taxpayer.

      The status quo is unacceptable.

      Any objective observer will see that Obama was blocking  reforms over the past 4 years.  He didn’t want his fingerprints on anything controversial.  Why did he abandon Simpson-Bowles?   He was the President.  He is supposed to lead.

  • Sy2502

    What gets me is why is anyone surprised by this Romney comment. Didn’t we already know how rich and privileged he is? We aren’t talking about a self made man here, nor a moderately wealthy individual. This man has never known need, he’s never had to worry about his next meal, or finding a job. He’s never had to make a single sacrifice in his life. Did anyone REALLY expect him to have any kind of understanding, let alone sympathy, for poorer people? When all you have known in life is privilege, you take it for granted rather than be thankful for what you have. Did anyone truly believe the politician’s facade he clumsily put up in public? 

    • gonkers

      What do you mean Romney’s never known need!!! Once when he and Ann were living off his stocks, they had to eat pasta and they couldn’t even entertain!!!!

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Don’t forget they had to use a ironing board for a dining room table.

        • gonkers

          Hadn’t the new furniture been delivered yet?

          • gonkers

             Maybe the “help” was on strike!!

            But I do feel for poor Ann, living off Mitt’s stock portfolio. That’s a struggle most Americans can relate to. Just like they feel her pain when the elevator for her Cadillac wasn’t ready yet. 

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Clearly you didn’t see the many heart wrenching testimonials from people Romney has selflessly helped by providing the most precious commodity anyone has, rich or poor —–TIME.

      • gonkers

        If one is rich, living off their stocks or other investments… pray tell, why is their time so precious when they’re not working?

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Why is Obama readying an $18M Hawaiian estate for moving in January of 2013?

    Internal polls?

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    OMG.

     Obama just tells Univision that the most important thing he’s learned as President: “You can’t change Washington from the inside, you can only change it from the outside”

    Suggestion to Obama: do your country a favor and resign and then you can try and change it from the outside.  It is the least you can do.

    So much for that promised ‘hope and change’.

    http://freebeacon.com/obama-you-cant-change-washington-from-the-inside/

  • gonkers

    Romney’s plunge continues at InTrade… now 30.8% chance of winning. So Worried, here’s your chance to make make a killing. Or are you waiting for Romney to drop to to 25%?

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      I’ll take that bet.  Does that increase my return if I put money on Romney?

      That’s the same intrade that had Santorum at 65%. How did that work out.

      • gonkers

         Do you live here?

        Already dealt with your Santorum objection. Things might have been different if he had momentum coming out of Iowa. But a “mistake” was made, Romney got the “win” even if he lost, and he got the momentum.

        As for InTrade… I have no opinion on it. I’m just bustin’ ya. 

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          No need to revisit the Iowa spin.

          I’ll take the bustin’ on intrade.  No problemo.  All’s fair.

          • gonkers

            No spin. I don’t know what the InTrade timeline was in that bet or how it was phrased… and I haven’t been able to find it to see how it matched up with events. But there was talk at the time that Rove would never let Romney lose Iowa… as as we know Rove has no scruples. The GOP Iowa strawpoll is run by the GOP so who knows how it can be manipulated.

          • Gregg Smith

            Just like the butterfly ballot and chad fiasco rules were designed by Democrats in 2000. Who knows how they manipulated them.

          • gonkers

            Sounds more like a bad design for the old voting machines that were being used. I doubt the “Dems” invented them.

          • Gregg Smith

            Nope, democrats designed the butterfly ballot, they made the rules, they controlled the process. It wasn’t about the machines.

          • gonkers

            The Dems designed the old punch card voting machines?

            The problem wasn’t just the ballot design, it was in the nature of using punchcards.

          • Gregg Smith

            Alrighty then.

          • Gregg Smith

            Alrighty then.

      • gonkers

         Yes, if Romney continues to drop, it increases the payback if he actually wins. Someone buying Romney for $3.00 would get $7 back. If it drops to 20% or $2 a share, the payback would be $8. I don’t know if there’s a fee to join.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           So there is no advantage to bet early because only the final odds count or can I buy a $10 Romney win for $3 today?

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           So there is no advantage to bet early because only the final odds count or can I buy a $10 Romney win for $3 today?

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Uh oh.

    VA dem Senate candidate, Tim Kaine,  is in favor of a minimum income tax for EVERYONE. He made the dreaded ‘skin in the game’ argument.

    He announced this bombshell in today’s debate.

    • gonkers

      Leaving aside this one Dem, there’s a fiscal schizophrenia in the GOP. They brag about taking millions off the tax rolls then complain they don’t pay taxes. It’s like Newt in the 90′s pushing for a balanced budget yet as soon as Clinton gets to one, he’s busy pushing for massive tax cuts. When Newt failed, Bush soon followed.

      Whatever the GOP’s game is one thing is certain. They LOVE debt because it helps “starve the beast”.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Romney response to Obama excuse that he can’t change Washington from the inside:

    http://www.therightscoop.com/boom-romney-tells-crowd-well-give-obama-a-chance-to-change-washington-from-the-outside-in-november/
     

    • gonkers

      And Romney can change dysfunctional, corrupt, and predatory capitalism from the inside?

      In the end, the deregulation of commodities, banking, and Wall Street was done BECAUSE THE PRIVATE SECTOR WANTED TO BE DEREGULATED and they paid their whores in Congress to do it.

    • Gregg Smith

      But he can make the oceans recede and heal the planet. 

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         I just listened to the full Obama clip.  Amazing.

        After he touts that he changed DC from the outside he went on to tout Obamacare as the primary example.  The process of passing Obamacare is the worst example of insider, uni-partisan sausage making — ever.

        • Gregg Smith

          Obama has gone from, “Yes we can” to “No, I can’t”.

  • JGC

    Video killed the Romney campaign, video killed the Romney campaign…

  • JGC

    Video killed the Romney campaign, video killed the Romney campaign…

    • Gregg Smith

      Gallup: Obama 47% Romney 47%.

    • Gregg Smith

      Gallup: Obama 47% Romney 47%.

      • JGC

        Which 47% is for Romney? Is that the 47% of the Freeloading Society?  L’il George Romney’s family spent some limited time on Welfare when they were refugees from Mexico in the early 20th c. (First they were refugees TO Mexico to escape the harsh and punitive American anti-polygamous society, then back to the U.S. when they found Mexico did not appreciate their ways so much, either.)
        And Paul Ryan applied for Social Security benefits to help him afford university, where l’il Paul ironically got his first megadose of Ayn Randian hyperindividualistic, anti-government policy. 
        At some point, virtually everyone will need some assistance.  Why can’t they admit it is beneficial to society?

        • Gregg Smith

          I understand the need to reframe the argument into an emotion. It’s just like throwing grandma over a cliff or making autistic children suffer because the rich don’t want a tax hike. It’s all he has, he sure can’t run on his abysmal record.

          Romney is not saying a safety net is not beneficial. No one is. No one is proposing doing away with welfare. 

  • superpage

    The more I listened to Steve Moore the more I grew irritated.  Steve Moore does NOT speak for me.  Several times during the discussion he made statements like, All Americans would agree, or everybody would say…… As if these things were so obvious that only a dullard would not agree with you.  You do not speak on behalf of all of America and you definitely do not speak for me.  This is a special tactic when you do not have the majority opinion to plant the seed that you do.  

    Mr. Moore also keeps hammering the GOP’s welfare attack on President Obama.  These have been debunked as blatantly false by every credible news and fact checking organization.  Just because he keeps saying it doesn’t mean it will become true.  It is false and he shows no shame by continuing to repeat it.  Twice at least, during this show.   

    Mr. Moore puts the icing on the cake by inconsiderately hanging up the phone during Tom’s thank you and goodbye.  Not too grateful for the NPR platform Tom was gracious enough to provide.  Shameless, inconsiderate, and factually challenged, he does not deserve to be on the editorial board of WSJ.  

    • TinaWrites

      The Republicans have been acting like steamrollers with this business of repeating falsehoods that have been proved to be falsehoods thru politifact, etc.  You point this out so well; and, yes, it IS infuriating when they then also seem to “wrap us up in the arms” of their false statements.  

      It’s bad enough that they do this.  It’s really WEIRD that these individual human beings can Stick With the Plan to the extent that they do when they play this tactic.  Don’t they have any individual integrity?  Don’t they have any individual way of expressing what their Republican POV is?  It’s Robot-land or Thru the Looking Glass Land.  And, I think that the lying can be considered mal-practice when it is exercised by already elected officials.   Having a conservative political POV is not mal-practice (as much as I and many others may disagree with it), but, when already elected officials like Paul Ryan lie, I believe that purposefully putting forth mis-information should be considered mal-practice.  If a teacher intentionally gave his/her public school students mis-information, I think we could consider that mal-practice.  Where’s the difference?  

  • Larry Hardesty

    I was honestly shocked by Stephen Moore’s performance on this show. He repeatedly simply ignored Tom’s questions and instead hammered Romney campaign talking points. You expect that from campaign staffers when they appear on talk shows, but not from ostensible journalists.

ONPOINT
TODAY
Apr 18, 2014
Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks during a nationally televised question-and-answer session in Moscow on Thursday, April 17, 2014. President Vladimir Putin has urged an end to the blockade of Moldova’s separatist province of Trans-Dniester. Trans-Dniester, located in eastern part of Moldova on border with Ukraine, has run its own affairs without international recognition since a 1992 war. Russian troops are stationed there.  (AP)

Deadly clashes in Eastern Ukraine. A white supremacist rocks Kansas City. The Marathon bombing anniversary. And Bloomberg on guns. Our weekly news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

Apr 18, 2014
This undated photo provided by NASA on April 2, 2014 shows Saturn's moon Enceladus. The "tiger stripes" are long fractures from which water vapor jets are emitted. Scientists have uncovered a vast ocean beneath the icy surface of the moon, they announced Thursday, April 3, 2014. Italian and American researchers made the discovery using Cassini, a NASA-European spacecraft still exploring Saturn and its rings 17 years after its launch from Cape Canaveral. (AP)

Oceans in Space. The new discovery on a moon of Saturn, and the possibility of life there.

RECENT
SHOWS
Apr 17, 2014
Ultra-Orthodox Jewish men burn leavened items in final preparation for the Passover holiday in the ultra-Orthodox Jewish town of Bnei Brak, near Tel Aviv, Israel, Monday, April 14, 2014. Jews are forbidden to eat leavened foodstuffs during the Passover holiday that celebrates the biblical story of the Israelites' escape from slavery and exodus from Egypt. (AP)

In the week of Passover and anti-Semitic gunfire, we look at the history of the Jews with acclaimed historian Simon Schama. Plus, Pope Francis and the Catholic Church today.

 
Apr 17, 2014
Students cheer and wave as President Barack Obama, not pictured, exits the podium after speaking at the University at Buffalo, in Buffalo, N.Y., Thursday, Aug. 22, 2013, beginning his two day bus tour speaking about college financial aid.  (AP)

The inside dope on college financial aid. The way it really works, who gets what, and how.

On Point Blog
On Point Blog
Some Tools And Tricks For College Financial Aid
Thursday, Apr 17, 2014

Some helpful links and tools for navigating FAFSA and other college financial aid tools.

More »
Comment
 
How Boston Is Getting Ready For the 2014 Boston Marathon
Tuesday, Apr 15, 2014

Boston Globe metro reporter Maria Cramer explains how the 2014 Boston Marathon will be different than races in the past.

More »
Comment
 
WBUR’s David Boeri: ‘There’s Still Much We Don’t Know’
Tuesday, Apr 15, 2014

WBUR’s senior reporter David Boeri details the ongoing investigation into the alleged Boston Marathon Bombing perpetrators.

More »
Comment