The poorest states, based on per capita income, are, from first to last: Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee, West Virginia, Louisiana, Montana, South Carolina, Kentucky, Alabama, and North Carolina. Of these, exactly half "Arkansas, Kentucky, Montana, North Carolina, and West Virginia" have Democratic governors and three have Democratic majorities in the lower house of their legislature, so these state governments can hardly be classified as completely Republican. On the other hand, only North Carolina voted for Obama in 2008, so in that sense, these states may be leaning Republican.
Oh I hope his message get repeat loud & often in these state time to send more money to a superpac that will do it.

-Ron-

What do you think?

-Ron-

I thought it was a good analysis.

Romney has a problem in that he must keep the GOP base satisfied, and still attract the 'undecideds' and independents -- thus the verbal equivlant of sleight of hand.

...and his presidential job description is Not to worry about those people??
oh yeah, almost forgot about his job experience while at Bain.

Mitt Romney 2012
What Me Worry?

Another "gem":

I have a very good team of extraordinarily experienced, highly successful consultants, a couple of people in particular who have done races around the world. I didn't realize it. These guys in the US - the Karl Rove equivalents - they do races all over the world: in Armenia, in Africa, in Israel. I mean, they work for Bibi Netanyahu in his race.

Rigging elections everywhere.

And, a lot of military families receive food stamps. And, any military person does not have to pay federal income taxes while they are serving in combat.

So, Romney is insulting a lot of people who, in the past have voted Republican. Seniors and military among them. But, many of those people will still vote for him. Which goes to show you that Ryan was right about one thing - smart people won't vote for them.

Here's the video (compare it to the clips from the secret fundraiser):

Romney Holds Damage Control Press Conference at 10pm EST

Keep those slogans coming... they reflect the Real R&R!

When it's taken out of context like this (and you damn well know it)? You're right. If he meant it the way you and the rest of the media are cutting it up, you might have a point.

He added: "These are people who pay no income tax."

Well isn't that an interesting new spin. People vote based on whether they pay taxes or not, not because of political affiliation.

Either that or everyone who pays no income tax is a democrat and everyone who does pay tax is a Republican!

Many who don't pay federal taxes don't becasue of legislation passed by Republicans to subsidize wages for large businesses. Ya think Mr Romney intends to tick off his corporate pals and rescind that law so more pay taxes?
Not a chance in you know where!

I hope that he is creamed for this statement....can't wait for the debates. This guy is feeding lines to President Obama.

I know the right wing blogosphere is all on about the lefties being gleeful over this, GEEZE LOUISE it's a Christmas present from KOLOB!

As President his priority is putting people back to work well "back implies" outta & those would be the feckless cruds sucking off yee old government teat. We been over on her before too a lot of the tighty righties didn't believe the unemployed needed to be unemployed well they could do something rather than collect unemployment. We hashed that out on here just no convincing some people that/ Welfare reform was a reform they will lie & lie & lie about it & no response from any of the tighty righties on the posts about that. CRICKETS. Nah Bill this mans a turd from the start was a turd when he lied about his taxes to become Governor of Massachusetts has lied about living in his sons basement I hope he's indicted for that 3 weeks before the election.
Context my Bronx Backside!

"I look at the Palestinians not wanting to see peace anyway, for political purposes, committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel, and these thorny issues, and I say there's just no way," Romney said, responding to a donor who asked about the possibility of peace between Israel and Palestine.

Romney continued, saying that peace is not attainable and there's nothing to do now: "[S]o what you do is, you say, you move things along the best way you can. You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem�and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it."

Romney said that pressuring Israel toward a settlement is a bad idea. "The idea of pushing on the Israelis to give something up to get the Palestinians to act is the worst idea in the world," Romney said. "

But in fact, the comments were in answer to a question about how to get those slackers to take some personal responsibility and Romney said he could not worry about them.

In addition, some of us think that the comments do offer a window into how he feels about the little people in America and that in general he intends not to govern for them, but for the other 53%.

Keep up the good work, Mittens. You continue to show how out of touch you are with the average American. Keep on talking; you're just shooting yourself in the foot....

The Washington Post's Chris Cillizza called it Romney's "darkest hour." Blogger Glenn Greenwald tweeted, "whenever you're convinced things can't get worse for the Romney campaign, they find a way to make it happen."

Bloomberg's Josh Barro said that the video was an "utter disaster" that "has killed Mitt Romney's campaign for president."

After the press conference, reviews were equally harsh.

"That was a desperate man in a desperate situation, " Lawrence O'Donnell opined on MSNBC after watching the press conference. Writing on his Atlantic blog, Ta-Nehisi Coates agreed. "I have never seen the candidate of a major party looking more shook than Romney does at this press conference," he wrote.

One tweet about the press conference: "Romney's explanation of his comments may be worse than the comments."

For the most part people who pay no federal income tax do so becasue the tax code allows them to. They are not doing anything differently than those who pay income tax except there income is such the legal deductions get them to a point where they don't have to pay.

The inference that those, like Mr Romney , who tax advantage of legitimate loopholes are somehow dependent on government,are " who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you-name-it," is beyond offensive.

It sure does show how he feels about the real middle class.

TRUE NEWT TRUE! It doesn't matter though because it's anyone but OBAMA if OBAMA supported ever one of Gingrich's positions it would still be anyone but OBAMA. From day 1 it was anyone but OBAMA they dragged the nation down the toilet even further with that model. Worst part the toadies that support them would see this nation burn to the ground even further as long as it's not OBAMA that's how effing irrational they are!

Meanwhile his other foot is in his mouth.

Mitt Romney 2012
No Legs to Stand On!

....Doubtful he'll move ahead of Obama but so far he is passing Biden.

Is anyone surprised he is revealed as a "sneering plutocrat that holds the less fortunate in contempt"? (Chait)

Remember this fortunate son was in France while war hero's like Kerry fount in nam...never forget who we are dealing with on the right and how they destroyed Kerry and lampooned all things france. These prod give us Romney and get people like bill to hats Kerry and defend Thurston Howell.

What a total piece of crape Romney is and for such a brilliant businessman he cant even run a campaign...

Exactly, chase! Romney doesn't offer the kind of serious changes to tax policy, he just want to lower rates and close a few, yet-to-be-named loopholes. I have NO confidence that his administration would do the kind of deep overall that people like demi (and the rest of us) would like.

In 1960, government transfers to individuals totaled $24 billion. By 2010, that total was 100 times as large. Even after adjusting for inflation, entitlement transfers to individuals have grown by more than 700 percent over the last 50 years. This spending surge, Eberstadt notes, has increased faster under Republican administrations than Democratic ones.

There are sensible conclusions to be drawn from these facts. You could say that the entitlement state is growing at an unsustainable rate and will bankrupt the country. You could also say that America is spending way too much on health care for the elderly and way too little on young families and investments in the future.

But these are not the sensible arguments that Mitt Romney made at a fund-raiser earlier this year. Romney, who criticizes President Obama for dividing the nation, divided the nation into two groups: the makers and the moochers. Forty-seven percent of the country, he said, are people "who are dependent upon government, who believe they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to take care of them, who believe they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it."

This comment suggests a few things. First, it suggests that he really doesn't know much about the country he inhabits. Who are these freeloaders? Is it the Iraq war veteran who goes to the V.A.? Is it the student getting a loan to go to college? Is it the retiree on Social Security or Medicare?

It suggests that Romney doesn't know much about the culture of America. Yes, the entitlement state has expanded, but America remains one of the hardest-working nations on earth. Americans work longer hours than just about anyone else. Americans believe in work more than almost any other people. Ninety-two percent say that hard work is the key to success, according to a 2009 Pew Research Survey.

It says that Romney doesn't know much about the political culture. Americans haven't become childlike worshipers of big government. On the contrary, trust in government has declined. The number of people who think government spending promotes social mobility has fallen.

The people who receive the disproportionate share of government spending are not big-government lovers. They are Republicans. They are senior citizens. They are white men with high school degrees. As Bill Galston of the Brookings Institution has noted, the people who have benefited from the entitlements explosion are middle-class workers, more so than the dependent poor.

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.

The Republican Party, and apparently Mitt Romney, too, has shifted over toward a much more hyperindividualistic and atomistic social view - from the Reaganesque language of common citizenship to the libertarian language of makers and takers. There's no way the country will trust the Republican Party to reform the welfare state if that party doesn't have a basic commitment to provide a safety net for those who suffer for no fault of their own.

The final thing the comment suggests is that Romney knows nothing about ambition and motivation. The formula he sketches is this: People who are forced to make it on their own have drive. People who receive benefits have dependency.

But, of course, no middle-class parent acts as if this is true. Middle-class parents don't deprive their children of benefits so they can learn to struggle on their own. They shower benefits on their children to give them more opportunities - so they can play sports, go on foreign trips and develop more skills.

People are motivated when they feel competent. They are motivated when they have more opportunities. Ambition is fired by possibility, not by deprivation, as a tour through the world's poorest regions makes clear.

Sure, there are some government programs that cultivate patterns of dependency in some people. I'd put federal disability payments and unemployment insurance in this category. But, as a description of America today, Romney's comment is a country-club fantasy. It's what self-satisfied millionaires say to each other. It reinforces every negative view people have about Romney.

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?"

End quote.

I particularly agree with the point that deprivation doesn't make people work harder or better, but opportunity does.

I for one am tired of working my tail off so that some Richard Cranium can sit around all day and jerk off.

Ignorance.

Those people "sitting around all day" and not paying taxes are your grandmother in her nursing home bed, your brother in the military and his family (on food stamps), your nieces and nephews who are much too young to work for a living, that disabled person (perhaps a veteran or your cousin with muscular dystrophy) who can't work--to sample a few categories.

What have you against those people that you should be so scornful and demeaning?

Kate

By contrast, high-income filers pay a lower percentage of their income in payroll taxes since wages subject to the Social Security tax are capped at $110,100.

And of course if you include sales taxes, then pretty much everyone pays.

What else should we have expected to hear from him?

Best wishes
Jon

This is so pathetic, this is not something a Presidential candidate should be caught saying, even to his rich country club buddies. Is nobody in charge? Romney is starting to make Vice President Biden look like a skilled orator.

from the guy who exported 10's of thousands of jobs to china

Most of the 47% who pay no federal income tax do so as a result of taking advantage of legitimates tax deductions that lower their incomes to below the taxable rate. The thought that people in this category are all Democrats is beyond absurd! This is no different from what Romney does!

I hope that the Obama campaign takes this right to the senior voting population. Seniors are a huge percentage of those who pay no taxes because of small incomes. They also use Medicare and collect SS. Exactly the "takers" Romney describes...and believe me they aren't all Democrats!

There is a huge difference between using the tax code to your advantage AND being "victims" who think they are "entitled"

As a single, self-employed person with no dependents, and an adjusted gross income of $5307, I still owed taxes. My income was about 51.63% of the official government poverty guideline for a single person. [Note: she paid $547 in federal taxes on AGI of $5307.]

I made about .02591% of what Mitt Romney did in 2010, and although my contribution probably wouldn't cover the cost of coffee and bottled water for one Senate session, I did pay taxes and I don't begrudge doing so.

I'm voting for President Obama. Not because I feel like a victim, or because I feel entitled to eat (god forbid!), or have a roof over my head, but because I don't want to live in an America run by a man who is so out of touch with reality, so far removed from anything resembling common life experience, that he sees 47% of American citizens -- the working poor, the lower middle-classes, the under and unemployed, the seniors, vets, and disabled -- as hapless, thieving vultures.I don't want a president who waffles on the minimum wage, then sheepishly follows the party line that touts $7.25 per hour ($15,080) as a livable wage, while "200-250 thousand or less" is middle class.

Romney isn't just slightly out of touch, he's in a Rove/Randian Twilight Zone. ... His ideas, most of them recycled from the Bush era, would be like an economic Project X for anyone not in the upper classes. Americans deserve better, whether they're in the 47% or 53%. We deserve a leader who shows civility, respect, and at least some understanding of the struggles average Americans are facing.

As an aside, how bill can charge the video and Romney's exact words are taken out of context, I can't fathom. Even Romney and his campaign doesn't "deny the legitimacy of the video or the accuracy of the quote". Right from the horse's mouth - no dancing.

I see what you did there

Not only do I not get this mindset, I've become impatient with it and I've become disgusted with it. This mindset deserves to be treated with derision. Common sense and logic does not sink in here.

-Ron-

Bill I find your statement ironic. Were you the one that carried You Did Not Build It" Banner above your head? No amount of explanation was good enough for you. But Romney comes out and says he meant what he said and you still want to defend the statement.

We see, hear, and understand what we desperately want I guess.

Because he is saying what I keep reading in this forum, I don't believe these comments will equate to any actual loss of supporters he had up until this point. It just means he is saying EXACTLY what most conservatives are thinking.

I think Mitt was completely honest in his comments, this actually is how he perceives 47 percent of the citizens of our country.

He voted for Bushjr, during who's reign l great many citizens lost their ability to support their family and a great many more, their entire retirement savings. He voted for Bushjr twice.

He is the very face of the current conservative party.

And poor along with lower middle income conservatives will vote for him.

esh thank you I was in need of a good laugh.

The more Romney opens his yap, the more disgusted and sick to my stomach I become. And his perceived ideas on foreign policy are scary, indeed.

To break it all down to brass tacks, he and his ilk could care less about anyone not within their class, and want desperately to war for more profiteering... they're finally saying out loud what they've been thinking all along, no longer bothering with any cloaking to at least make themselves look decent.

Pathetic.

Just look at the twisted syntax of his statement. His job is NOT to worry? So his job will be to NOT do something. Nice.

He has contempt for their elderly Mothers, Aunts, Uncles, children. They want health care, and those social security checks they worked for and now expect the government to take care of them amazing.

"This could be the opportunity for Romney, and for that campaign, to finally take the gloves off and take the fear off and just start explaining conservatism, start explaining liberty to people and what it means."
HUZZAH yah know he just did it for me I often wondered what those people were talking about when they said liberty was about repressing gay rights & forcing women to carry rapes to term!

Mitt Romney 2012
Add Lots of Sugar!

I don't think he's capable of explaining conservatism. The reason he can't explain it is because he's not a conservative, nor is he anything else. The man has no principles and so what he really is is an opportunist. He's for it if it benefits him. Hence, the flip and flop.

Don't get me wrong, I'm against any unnecessary handouts. I believe in people working for thier money (the ones who can), even if it's volunteering for local government,or the private sector. I think it's a good way to get experience and a J-O-B eventually, while the economy recovers. I believe that "mothers" or the unemployed should volunteer for a few hours a week while they are looking for work, so their check in the mail is NOT free and doesn't give their kids a bad example-that they don't have to work ;)

Having said that, it's disgusting to see that ANYONE in the US would have Romney's views. It's just plain WRONG.
The major reason that the 47% are in the shape they are in is because the US jobs have been outsourced.

Romney is dangerous, with Hitler-like mentality/views. He was born with a silver spoon and thinks that others are lazy because they have not had his opportunities. Those of you who support him should be ashamed of yourselves.

Signed,
an INDEPEDENT.

*

Here we go again, bringing personal character into what should be just an opinion.

I will suggest that perhaps YOU are the one that should be ashamed of yourself for passing that kind of judgment on posters because they support a candidate you do not.

Mitt Romney's comments about those who do not pay income taxes appeared to harden the views Georgians already hold about the Republican presidential nominee, both positive and negative.

Tim Brown, 45, a Carrollton Republican, said he was pleased with what Romney said.

"The only thing that is news about this is that a politician had the chutzpah to speak the truth. We have become a society that is constantly searching ways to claim victimization," Brown said.

Jessica Zarter, 28, of East Cobb said she plans to vote for Romney but has grown frustrated with his verbal stumbles.

"Was it smart for Romney to voice his opinion aloud? No!" Zarter said. "He should be told exactly what to say and when to say it until he is in office. He shouldn't open his mouth without it being censored by 100 people first."

Really? He shouldn't say anything on his own? What kind of candidate is that?

Posted by demifloyd 8 (My Page) on Tue, Sep 18, 12 at 19:10

Those of you who support him should be ashamed of yourselves.
*

Here we go again, bringing personal character into what should be just an opinion.

I will suggest that perhaps YOU are the one that should be ashamed of yourself for passing that kind of judgment on posters because they support a candidate you do not.
*******************************************

$hit, my grandfather who lived in Germany during WWll, crossed the borders to fight the Nazi's... and worked with the British. He knew Hitler was wrong from Day 1.
Some people don't know History, like you....

So is your insipid remark about my knowledge of history, when we're not even discussing history.

I hope you get better.

Notto, your remarks about your grandfather and Nazis right after quoting my last post is disconcerting, to say the least.
So is your insipid remark about my knowledge of history, when we're not even discussing history.

I hope you get better.
*****************************************************
Of course we're discussing history. You don't think that elections and political views qualify as "history" in the making?
I guess, some people "just pull a certain lever" cuz they want to feel superior.

Watch my language? I'm not the one spewing "Mein Kampf" ;)

"I'm sort of a WWII buff.....and Rip Nomney (Romney) scares the $hit out of me. It reminds me of how Hitler spewed his hatered. Hitler was really against the disabled, old, and Jews....I am totally and permanently disgusted.
Don't get me wrong, I'm against any unnecessary handouts. I believe in people working for thier money (the ones who can), even if it's volunteering for local government,or the private sector. I think it's a good way to get experience and a J-O-B eventually, while the economy recovers. I believe that "mothers" or the unemployed should volunteer for a few hours a week while they are looking for work, so their check in the mail is NOT free and doesn't give their kids a bad example-that they don't have to work ;)

Having said that, it's disgusting to see that ANYONE in the US would have Romney's views. It's just plain WRONG.
The major reason that the 47% are in the shape they are in is because the US jobs have been outsourced.

Romney is dangerous, with Hitler-like mentality/views. He was born with a silver spoon and thinks that others are lazy because they have not had his opportunities. Those of you who support him should be ashamed of yourselves.

Signed,
an INDEPEDENT"

Well thank goodness notto is notto independent. How embarrassing that would be.

You have made at least three references about Hitler in two threads, in response to my posts, and used profanity by substituting a character for only one letter of the profane word.

Apparently you are not in any condition or mood to discuss a topic in a cogent, polite and nonaggressive manner.

So you can keep your Hitler accusations about me and profane comments to yourself, or you can post more and we can see what happens.

It appears it was probably the catering service. Now that is a kick in the head. I can imagine them working probably their third job trying to make ends meet and you are waiting on these people that are calling you lazy dirt, sit on your butt all day to your face.

But the final person that acquired the tapes and got it to broadcast and into the spotlight that person is Jimmy Carter's Grandson. He is not happy about Romney speaking harshly about his granddaddy. He has pissed off the wrong people. You do not talk about his grandfather.

This man is probably the worst person I can imagine running to care for the citizens of the United States. He demonstrates scorn for half the United States. How does anyone have this type of view of the people you are asking to vote for you.

@ Notto: Ignore the kindergarten. They're irrelevant.

The central problem revealed by the tape is Romney's theory of the 2012 election. It is that a high percentage of the electorate receives government checks and therefore won't vote for him, another high percentage is supplying the tax revenues and will vote for him, and almost half the people don't pay taxes and presumably won't vote for him.

My goodness, that's a lot of people who won't vote for you. You wonder how he gets up in the morning.

This is not how big leaders talk, it's how shallow campaign operatives talk: They slice and dice the electorate like that, they see everything as determined by this interest or that. They're usually young enough and dumb enough that nobody holds it against them, but they don't know anything. They don't know much about America.

We are a big, complicated nation. And we are human beings. We are people. We have souls. We are complex. We are not data points. Many things go into our decisions and our political affiliations.

You have to be sophisticated to know that. And if you're operating at the top of national politics, you're supposed to be sophisticated.

I agree. And isn't she on his side?
And who was it that accused President Obama of class warfare? Well, apparently Romney believes in the concept himself.

And I like this:

[T]he logic of Romney’s fundraising has seemed, for some time, slightly crazy. He’s raising money so he can pile it in at the end, with ads. But at the end will they make much difference? Obama is said to have used a lot of his money early on, to paint a portrait of Romney as Thurston Howell III, as David Brooks put it. That was a gamble on Obama’s part: spend it now, pull ahead in the battlegrounds, once we pull ahead more money will come in because money follows winners, not losers.

If I’m seeing things right, that strategy is paying off.

Romney’s staff used to brag they had a lower burn rate, they were saving it up. For what? For the moment when Americans would rather poke out their eyeballs and stomp on the goo than listen to another ad?

What to do?

It’s time to admit the Romney campaign is an incompetent one. It’s not big, it’s not brave, it’s not thoughtfully tackling great issues. It’s always been too small for the moment. All the activists, party supporters and big donors should be pushing for change. People want to focus on who at the top is least constructive and most responsible. Fine, but Mitt Romney is no puppet: He chooses who to listen to. An intervention is in order. “Mitt, this isn’t working.”

I hope he doesn't listen to her.

In that statement this is what the basic Conservative bible. But when it is spoken out in QUIET ROOMS suddenly they do not like the way it sounds? Read it........

not big, it's not brave, it's not thoughtfully tackling great issues. It's always been too small for the moment.

Big would be looking at different issues of need, Brave would be saying there are people that need help, thoughtful would be caring for those in need, to tackle great issues you have to accept there are issues that caused people's situation.

One of the reasons when I try to understand from the Conservatives here it always comes across as small minded thinking no further than....

THERE IS NO ROOM FOR ANYONE THAT ARE NOT WHERE I AM FINANCIALLY NOW. If you are not there too bad. You did something wrong and you are lazy. You cannot have any of my money.

That is small minded. Easy for other countries think that the USA is not a civilized country. A civilized society care for their fellow man whether they are next door or on the other side of the country.

Coupled with if you throw Christian in the Conservative camp. Christian teachings do not support the policy or the attitude. This is a confused bunch. They want to be Satan like and talk Christian. It just does not work hand in hand.

So the message is small minded for the small minded. Not Smart.

Kudos to the Carter family member who outed this. As he said today on national TV, it is "poetic justice."

Mitt Romney 2012
It's Nothing Personal!

The GOP has not projected an image of being "the people's" party. They have, instead, promulgated one of selfishness, of "every man for himself", one of dictatorial authority over the lower classes, and around the globe.

How many times has it been said... America is not a corporation, not a business, and cannot be run like one.

We are a nation filled with peoples of all kinds, and it's the government's job to uphold our Constitution and strive to make our nation better, from within... not tear it apart and move it piece by piece to foreign shores. We want, and need, to be a peaceful, helpful part of our global community... not a giant military or corporate rolling pin that goes around the globe flattening everything good and turning it into personal wealth for the few. That's not in any of our ideals.

It IS personal... to us all. We all have a small stake in how we're governed, and in how we're viewed and how we interact with the rest of the world.

And while we know corruption exists in all political parties, it seems a lot more overt in the party that calls itself conservative.

I know there are a lot of moderate conservatives out there that don't like what their own party has become, and while a few are being vocal... I just wish more were vocal about it, more active in casting out the bad apples that have taken over... instead of holding them up and pretending not to notice how tainted they are, how far from being "the people's" leaders, and having those true Christian ideals, these opportunistic, self-interested politicians are.

Remember Cheney and his secret meetings with the energy executives designing the country's energy policies and the results of that - the whole-sale fracking with no EPA oversight, leasing federal lands for oil and gas production with impossibly strict time limits on environmental impact assessments, so just go ahead and drill?

Remember the wholesale privatization of the national intelligence apparatus, changing huge swathes of military operations into private contracts - everything from embassy guards to logistics to prisoner interrogation? Remember the attempts to privatize the weather service, operations at national parks, and the suggestions to sell off the national forests and BLM lands to productive, private use?

Remember the massive tax cuts rammed through the congress - twice?

He's schmoozing with his mega-donors and talking their talk. Lets vote them back into office - it worked out so well the last time.

So what does that have to do with the subject at hand lily? As usual you just couldn't pass up a chance to make a spiteful remark regarding Romney, his family or his supporters. What does Ann's hair being bleached, Ann wearing an eight hundred dollar blouse, his son's mission work or whether his "G-pa" actually had "twenty" wives have to do with Romney's abilities. If it does, and you seem to think so, I guess the fact that barack hussein obama sr already having a wife when he married jr's mom and lying to her by telling her he was divorced and the fact that michele wore a $6,800 jacket to the Olympic openings and is often seen wearing designer clothes costing thousands of dollars must also affect obama's abilities..................Please, let's get serious here and discuss things that are important regarding the candidates; things that affect our country, not insignificant details such as Mitt's G-pa having more than one wife or which designer outfits Ann or Michell are wearing.

" 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." This statement ring a bell with anyone? Sounds to me as if a pair of peppermint shoes wouldn't hurt either candidate.

Bush 8 years = Spent a surplus and added trillions in debt
Obama 3 years = Why has he not found the money (surplus) Bush lost and put the surplus back and replace the deficit.

This is simple. Why cannot simple minds grasp.

At least now we know whose policies would truly promote class warfare.

He has totally incompetent advisors, as far as his campaign. And his financial and foreign policy advisors also show his abilities and mindset. That should be a good indication of what his presidency would be. Scary and worse than GWB.

Brat..I see you've been lurking. It's okay when you dish it out on Obama , not so much fun when it's reversed, is it? The truth is Obama apologized immediately for his bitter remark, which living in PA I can assure you is the absolute truth . Romney isn't backing down and means every word. Nail in the coffin.

By the way, I'm glad Mitt didn't apologize regarding his comments about Israel and the Palestinians.......no need to apologize for the truth.

Probably won't have time to post much after today......gotta get back to my enjoying my real life. Try not to miss me too much.

_______________________________________________________________

I see the damage-controll is in full swing.

Roughseas already posted the numbers, That 47% paid more than Romney in taxes and guess what it's deafeningly silent in there.

Attempting to defend Romney's remarks has only one efect: It shows their moral poverty.

Don't you even recognize sarcasm lily........must be a reading comprehension problem. Truthfully I'm sure you didn't miss me almost "almost" as much as I didn't miss you, but since you are the one who noticed that I hadn't been around ................We do have one thing in common though with changes to a few words " I am scared to death of a second obama presidency just as I was scared to death about the first four obama years. I follow my instincts, and in the obama case I was SOOOO right." No matter how long I stay away it seems HT never changes. Got exciting plans for the rest of the week, no time for computers and forums... Behave yourselves Children.

He said he is not going to the states and campaigning like he wants the job. He is going out 2 - 3 days a week. That schedule problem I think he is just not use to working long hours or days and he is not young. He walks like he has a back problem.

Plus he felt this was going to be easy and he knew he had a lot of big money donators and he could buy the election and sit back and collect his Presidential prize.

Romney was honest and essentially he was saying those who make collecting government benefits a way of life will not be voting for him. What's the problem? It's the truth? He was not including seniors or veterans, etc. He was including bums whose only job is to keep their hand out!!!

That foolishness about Obama being for all the people. Yea, all but the rich white guys. LOL He stomps all over our Constitution and wants to bring white corporate America to its' knees.

Please, give examples.

Check your facts. Seniors, veterans and many other voters are included in the 47%.

The fabled 47% who don't pay income taxes are a favorite talking point for many conservative pundits and politicians, who often use them as evidence that America's expenses are paid by a relatively small portion of the populace, while the rest -- in Romney's words -- don't "take personal responsibility" for themselves.

What gets lost in the discussion is a real consideration of who these people actually are, how and where they live, and why they are exempt from that particular tax. The answers to these questions help explain a large part of the disconnect between the Democrats and the Republicans -- and the ideological differences underlying the current presidential campaign.

Who Are the 47%?

According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, 53.6% of Americans pay a portion of their income in federal income taxes, and 46.4% don't. Of those who don't, 61% (28.3% of the population) pay payroll taxes, such as Social Security and Medicare, but have enough deductions and tax credits that their federal income tax liability has shrunk to zero. In other words, 81.9% of the population is gainfully employed and sends some measure of their income to the federal government.

As for the rest, 10.3% of the population -- 22% of non-income tax payers -- are elderly and are likely unemployed, i.e., retired. A further 6.9% are non-elderly but have incomes below $20,000, which in most cases puts them below the poverty line.

For that matter, it's not as if the rest of the 47% -- or, actually, 46% -- are doing especially well. Nearly 90% of the group consists of households making less than $50,000 per year, and 80% make less than $30,000. The remainder is mostly composed of higher-income households that benefit from significant tax credits for children and education.

This isn't to say that everyone who doesn't pay taxes is struggling. About 162,000 people among the top 10% of earners have found ways to avoid paying any federal income tax. This includes approximately 3,000 people in the top 0.1%, a group that makes $2,178,886 per year or more. A large part of their low tax rate, The New York Times' Bruce Bartlett suggested, lies in the fact that many -- like Romney -- derive most of their income from capital gains, which are only taxed at 15%. To further cut their liability, many are able to offset their taxes because of losses that they took in previous years. Alternately, some invest in tax-free municipal bonds or take advantage of a slew of other tax loopholes.

Where Do the 47% Live?

The fact that Romney's party largely created the 47% isn't the only irony in his attacks. Perhaps more striking is the fact that an outsized percentage of the 47% live in "red states." Of the 10 states with the highest percentage of income tax nonpayers, only one -- New Mexico -- is leaning toward Obama right now. Meanwhile, of the 10 states with the lowest percentage of income tax nonpayers, only two -- North Dakota and Wyoming -- skew right.

And therein lies perhaps the strangest aspect of Romney's complaint. Not only does he not seem to understand the group that he's discussing or the way that it was created, but his final statement, that "these are people who pay no income tax ... My job is not to worry about those people," directly contradicts the electoral map. The choir that he's preaching to actually contains a large percentage of the very people that he just wrote off.

He shot himself in the foot yet again. One of the very few things that he has been consistent with.

Please, give examples.

Romney explained himself today.

He uses that number regularly so either he doesn't know who that number comprises (he should if he is going to use it) or distorted the facts for effect (he shouldn't at the risk of offending a large number of voters).

Romney is never accurate. His numbers are skewed and his promises are vague, lacking any details. When will he start? We are only 47 days before the election.

"So Mitt Romney thinks if you don't pay income taxes, then you're a handout-addicted moocher who can't take responsibility for bettering yourself.

Harsh. That's mean to say such a thing about Boeing.

Wait ... Boeing? That wasn't who Romney was talking about in his closed-door riff about how the freeloading 47 percent are dragging down this otherwise hardworking, Republican nation.

Yet it remains peskily true that in any accounting of who pays zilch to the federal enterprise, our aerospace superstar is at the top of a long list. In 2011, Boeing had no net income-tax liability for the fourth year in a row, despite $5.1 billion in profits.

I bring this up because Romney, in his foolish slighting of nearly half a nation he's trying to woo, blundered into one of my own hobbyhorses. Namely, that not enough people in this country pay income taxes.

And by "people," I graciously include our newest citizens, the corporations.

Last year, I did a series of columns about who doesn't pay income taxes, and why this hurts both democracy and the federal balance sheet. The zero club included Boeing all the way down to a Seattle ship worker making five figures who revealed his income taxes somehow went below zero � meaning the government was paying him to live here.

"How on earth can a country operate this way?" the ship worker wondered, sensibly.

What's so off-putting about Romney's take on this is whom he blames: You. Well, about half of you. The 47 percent who pay no income taxes "believe they are victims," he said, and so have become wards of the state.

"I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives," he said.

Now clearly he's talking about a lot more than taxes here. His comments were a grab bag of right-wing gripes about how the other half is soft and on the dole.

But the sharp dividing line between who is a maker and who is a taker appears to be if you paid income taxes (that's where the 47 percent figure comes from � it's the count of how many Americans have no net income-tax liability.)

One conservative movement last year took up this cry by saying, "We are the 53 percent." Meaning, we are the producers in this land of slackers.

But these formulations are bogus. Obviously, Boeing is no deadbeat � the company is a jobs factory right now and pumps $1 billion a week into the economy. That ship worker was no layabout either. The reason he had less than zero tax liability is because he supported two kids, as well his wife who was in college � both of which made him eligible for big tax credits.

The point being: It's not really our fault we no longer pay, Mitt. It's your party's fault. And a reckless Congress. They are the ones that keep slashing taxes, and larding up the tax code with so many special-interest loopholes, that tens of millions of people, and thousands of corporations, have fallen off the income-tax rolls in the past decade.

Most people pay plenty of other taxes, including payroll taxes. But this debate is about the general income tax, which is crucial to whether the nation can pay its bills.

It makes no sense that a candidate who wants to cut income taxes even further would be aggrieved by people not paying. Wasn't that the goal?

On the flip side, if the point is that most everyone should have some skin in the game, then there's only one thing to be done about that: Raise taxes! On Boeing and the ship worker and many in between.

No, there's so little internal logic to the attack on the 47 percent that I can't help but think it's shorthand for something else: demonizing government. Those people (whose taxes we cut) no longer even pay into this crazy system. The ingrates. Nothing left to do but slash the system.

Someone once called this starving the government so you can drown it in the bathtub.

Amazing that such a fringe view now has become the platform, unofficially and behind closed doors anyway, of one of our two major political parties."

Rasmussen is desperately trying to skew the numbers. I'm surprised they're not reduced to releasing new polling 3-4 times a day for each state!

Realclearpolitics use to have Romney's leads prominently displayed. Now they have little down arrows to show when a swing state pushes Obamas numbers down temporarily when Rasmussen pops a new poll in. These pathetic little exercises should be an embarrassment, one would think...but no, they just keep on pushing it.

About a month ago, I thought this was going to be a squeaker but now I think Obama will beat Romney by about the same amount he beat McCain. I hope this means the Democrats will get some extra house seats too.

-Ron-

I saw Obama on Letterman and loved it. He was great and Letterman asked good questions and got good answers. Mitt hates Dave. Dave said so tonight. I wouldn't doubt it because Dave is very liberal and makes Mitt jokes every night. .

And it's good to see that maddie has found her soul mate.

I would agree that certain polls are skewed and not to be taken seriously. There are a lot of if's and variables to many of the polls right now.

I'd rather go by what I see and read and hear, and by what history has to show me. When added up, it tells me exactly who to cast my vote for.

That includes cases of people that are receiving welfare that should not be (that fits under fraud). Fiscal conservatives don't have the lock on wanting to clean up waste and fraud.

Only in the sense of a knee-trembler, my friend. He's given them so many favors his own knees should be raw.

/end of wordplay in bad taste

Actually I think you'll find that far more people agree with Romney about the people, some who are taking a free ride, some who have no choice but to take the ride. They need jobs. Many liberals agree with Obama regarding redistribution of wealth, and they will vote accordingly.
***********************************************************

Honey,

I'm not a Dem or Rep, but the Semantics are ticking me off.
Wealth is REDISTRIBUTED up or down, no matter who does it.

Why are you chanting "redistribution"? Is it because the Republicans coined THAT phrase, playing psychological warfare (it's obviously working, because the poor people in the flyover zones are chanting...."give the money to the rich, Vote R & R! Gawh, brain washing at its' best!) , whereas if you tax people PROGRESSIVELY and fairly you call it "giving it to the moochers?"

I don't believe that half of the US are moochers. You may find a few people here and there, but for the most part people WANT TO WORK, and make GOOD money.

Trust me, many on the top are parasites (I have been around people with money and they have the Romney 'tude. It's all about them. Employees don't need to make good money, or healthcare...). Many are taking advantage of the employees as we speak, even though their companies are raking it in.

So take your pick: will it be moochers or parasites?

BTW- trickle down has never worked, and never will, so why redistribute upwardly?

What exactly do you mean by white corporate America? I never thought of corporations in racial terms.

So, how about those examples?

What....no examples? None?

Yep, it's true, we already knew there were none. There never are.

Thanks for your ever pertinent and very revealing questions, Frank. It gets interesting around here when you decide to drill down.

That foolishness about Obama being for all the people. Yea, all but the rich white guys. LOL

That is correct. He's not too worried about that 1%. Much more concerned with the 99%. Complete opposite of her guy. And for some reason she thinks that's laugh out loud funny. Strange.

GGM while you are answering Frank perhaps you could answer JZ as well.

What is "white" corporate America? Is there also a "black" one that the President isn't stomping on? I have never heard corporate America described that way before....interesting observation.

This is a variation on a theme I harped on in a couple threads recently--and was mostly ignored.

The higher up you go in the verious centers of power (such as big government and big business/corporations, the more white and male they become.

Women and minorities have made it up to the middle-management level, but the glass ceiling is only cracked--not broken. And what we see through the cracks is white and male mostly.

The white patriarchy still rules. And no, there is no alternate black patriarchy. Power is predominately white and male in this country.

Kate

Come on! Please elaborate and explain why you hold this opinion.

I don't know why those anti-Obama-ites think that way (there are also variations on that line of thought). I guess we must go back to that basic observation: racism is IRRATIONAL.

Kate

Sad as it is I think those wig hat wearers of the past would not be proud of the policies of those today, They would not sit and see their neighbors barn burn to the ground and sit back and say he did not take Personal Responsibility so his barn did not burn.

If they read some history books.... I know there goes that read thing but the honorable thing was to care for others. They would go miles to help someone they heard that was in trouble. Family was important if they were on top they lifted other family members to sit up on the pedestal with them.

The me, myself, and I that is in the hearts of people is astonishing..

Racism IS irrational. But that doesn't make it any less a part of our social institution. We have only to look as far as our law enforcement/court/prison systems to see this.

The irrational idea that Obama is an evil Muslim stomping on our Constitution, and looking to tear America down... is complete hogwash! It's nothing more than an extremist view, a talking point fed to anyone without the critical thinking skills to walk through reality and look at facts.

The ridiculousness emanating from the far right is so off kilter. I can't even grasp the concept of taking such ridiculousness at face value, without verifying any piece of information! It makes no sense, whatsoever, from a standpoint of rational thinking and common sense!

How do grown adults walk around repeating whatever they hear, taking it as gospel, without first checking into it to ensure accuracy?!

And Marquest is correct... I can't even fathom the level of self-interest and greed that would make a person think of themselves first and foremost, forgetting that no one is alone in the world, or is more important than the next person!

What has the collective "we" become?!

We're waiting.

After the first few, containing ideas on origin of birth, questioning religious affiliation and political ideals, I put a stop to it by countering one such email with a lesson in logical thinking, using facts and reality to show the inaccuracy of such trash.

Consequently, I didn't have to keep emptying my spam box, which filters out the junk.

I don't know, Jill... it boggles the mind. To think that there are grown adults out there lacking the basic skills to tell the difference between a vetted fact, and something they want to be true... it simply boggles the mind. Common sense, critical thinking, and problem solving skills seem to have taken a huge nosedive in the US within recent years.

I just keep hoping there's a sane majority out there...

"Sadly, I'm reminded of the chain emails people kept littering my email box with post Obama election. I couldn't wrap my brain around the contents, or why anyone in their right mind would believe any of it, or want to show such abject ignorance by rinsing and repeating. It didn't make any sense.
After the first few, containing ideas on origin of birth, questioning religious affiliation and political ideals, I put a stop to it by countering one such email with a lesson in logical thinking, using facts and reality to show the inaccuracy of such trash."

Why would your friends send you these emails, surely knowing where your sentiments lie? I receive NO junk mail; some political solications from the dems, no doubt based on candidates I'm giving $$ to, but that's it. Your husband knows something about computer and related technology, block this stuff.

I "can't wrap my brain" around you having time to do the educating you talked about, and still spend the time on HT, not to mention the rest having time for "real" life.

Could it be ability? Because it takes them so much time to reply if they see a couple of post it amazes them. They assume by judging what it would take them to post a detailed, and grammatically correct reply it would take them all day.

Even when they take all day to rise to her level they fail miserably, get angry, and cry, "Not fair, you are picking on me, you are on the computer all day". See it is defense. It is all they have left.

I would say don't judge Jodi by your abilities. Some can run a mile much faster than others.

I noted the 8 month mark of outrage because it was so incredible. Did they not grasp the horrific mess which their guy they voted for TWICE left behind.
A huge part of their problem, imo, is that they honestly do not grasp it. They don't realize how to the edge we were - even the experts did not realize it, and how great the fall out would be, how the domino effect would last so long. They don't have the vision to see the damage their team left behind, which is why they don't grasp why it's not all cleaned up in time for the next conservative to play war with.

Even the line up for the primary was an unbelievable joke. Except for one, (coulda, woulda, shoulda!) it struck me as so "you can't be serious!"--- and yet, they didin't have that reaction at all. They loved each one until the 'stupid' factor each one came with got too obvious.
I do believe that most conservative voters felt that at this point, the champagne corks would be popping because the election itself would be only a formality.

I am sure that my initial reaction to the "why" regarding the primary line up is correct.
Those republican politicians who are more in the classification of "Huntsman" understood that they could not win, so they let the donkeys out to play.

Conservatives are in disbelief that this is not a done deal like they kept crowing it would be since month 8 of President Obamas term.
And now they are very upset. They have to pick and choose the poll numbers which will reflect back to them what they want to believe. The bile is coming up.....I suspect there is some ugly bile that they, themselves didn't realize was hidden in there.

But it's coming. There are more like CW and Molly than the responsible conservatives realizes and that is a HUGE problem that has to be dealt with by the politicians and conservative voters.
They courted that particular class of voters who vote in a block - courted them for decades (remember the term: "Christian coalition?") - now they are stuck with them.
The teabagger class of voters are a class of their own making, they lost control, the future on how they try to get back in the driver's seat will be interesting to watch.
Of course it might be something as simple as these people will have shot themselves in the foot so much that they end up fading away.

But we will see more of this - much more, especially if Obama wins, then it will get REALLY ugly for a few months just like it did the last time.
I remember the e-mails I got and deleted for a few months until I did a little blocking. I remember them very well. Repulsive minds with repulsive senses of humors.

(I'm so sorry, but it was only a joke! Can't you take a JOKE? You know I'm not racist and have never been a racist but it was only a JOKE! That's the problem with you liberals, you don't have any sense of humor.)

Yeah. Like that.

I distinctly remember a time when she posted 270+ (more like 280+)times in a single month. TWICE the number of what anyone else posted at the time, I was shocked she could spend so much time on the computer, just in H.T. I mean, who has that kind of time?

She had been beating the numbers for a long time but that month was a real hum-dinger.

Someone gave her a clue that there was a place to track participation and shortly after that the number dropped like a STONE, she almost disappeared from our sight.

But not from our mind - never fear Elvis - we know you are always with us!

That is interesting. So often people think they are Anonymous.

Mylab, its even worse since the boardreader gives the stats for the week not the month.

I wonder why bother if Obama is the shoe in so many claim?

I hope everyone is prepared for the repercussions of four more years of rising gas prices, rising grocery prices, permanent high unemployment, likely inflation, rising debt, continued out of control spending, appeasement to terrorists, "transparency," and tax money going to illegals.

I hope everyone is prepared for the repercussions of four more years
I will be prepared for more years of growing economy to repair the damage the last Republican President left that took him eight years to throw away a surplus and added the large debt

Bush = Started with Surplus and 8 years later surplus gone and a large deficit left to be cleaned up.
Obama = Started with a deficit and failed economy. After 3 years we are starting to come back from the Bush 8 years. Sorry that what it took Bush 8 years to throw away we could not fix in 3. But I guess math is not a Conservative strong point.. Give them 8 years to piss it away but fix it in 3 years.

of rising gas prices,
I expect the gas prices will reflect the world economy as it did when every other President held the office and depending on if the welfare payments to prop the levees for the citizens of Louisiana hold up and they can keep pumping

rising grocery prices,
Grocery prices will reflect the availability of crops. The President is not a farmer nor is he God so he does not control the climate.

permanent high unemployment,
I expect employment will continue to grow as it has since the last Republican crashed the stock market and sent us into a recession

likely inflation,
unlikely if Obama is re-elected and he continue to add jobs

rising debt,
again unlikely if Obama is re-elected congress will realize obstruction does not work

continued out of control spending,
Spending is what the government is suppose to do they are not a saving account

appeasement to terrorists,
If he continues to appease the terrorists like he appeased Bin Laden and many of his friends and not let them thumb their noses at us like Bush did, I want him to keep up that appeasement. He can appease a few more with his drones. I like that kind of appeasement I guess you wanted them to live, not me I had relatives that died 9/11. I guess you do not like appeasement.

"transparency," and
transparency has not been a problem it is the ability of some that cannot read and comprehend. He is working on that education thing,

tax money going to illegals.
tax money that is not going to the illegals is not happening now and when that education and reading problem is fixed the next generation will get that point

The last time I talk to you I remember you asked me if I envied you. That topic topped out before I came home that night.

My answer is no. If I had your life and worried about things that were not true and was as unhappy as you are I would slit my wrist and draw a warm bath. I am to happy to want the life you live. I would not want that life.

It's none of my concern or interest how you live your life.

You know nothing of mine to make the statements you did--your comments are insinuation only.

I'd "slit my wrists," as you say, if I were as hateful and insulting to people as you are to me.

*

Labrea,

Come, now.

My posts are an example of brevity compared to those robo posts that go on and on and on and on and on and on and on (how's that for brevity?) accusing anyone that does not agree with them of being (a) stupid (b) selfish (c) uncaring (d) incapable of independent thought (e) etc. whatever else makes one feel good about themselves by making up insults about others.

Perhaps your next admonition can be about flogging a dead imaginary horse.

Or... perhaps they're unaware that some people are able to set their own schedules, and can multi-task, reading more than one item at a time and retaining the information therein. Perhaps they do not have the opportunity to set their own scheduling, or can't concentrate on more than one job at a time. Perhaps their priorities differ considerably. One never knows.

Still... why anyone would be so keen to delve into the personal life of another, or so quick to take someone else to task after having been shown in dissimulation, I couldn't say. Perhaps they might think about rearranging their life so they, too, could set their own scheduling... or maybe learn to multi-task so time is used effectively, keeping priorities in mind...

A most perplexing situation, to be sure... but one I'm certain they'll be able to handle without insider knowledge of my personal schedule or priorities, which don't relate to the topic, at all.

Why should anyone be curious as to how another spends time? Why would anyone bother, or feel it necessary, to explain why they spend time doing whatever it is they do?

It becomes obvious, however, that if one is bemoaning the consequences of not having enough financial resources to do what they want to do in life, yet has literally hours a day to play on Hot Topics, that it is reasonable to note a disparity in actions and desired outcomes.

Basically, posters aren't stupid.
Nothing more, nothing less.

Trolling pays as a few have pointed out.

We have had people that have revealed professions that a lurker may see and say they would use that person to do a certain job or because of what a person expresses they would not use them for a job.

I have learned from this forum and other forums what people do for a living. I have family and friends in those cities. I can advise those friends and family that certain people are not a person they should hire.

So time spent here at HT is used for more than just discussing Republican and Democratic issues. There is info being shared and is useful for income.