Entitlement Children Hate That They Are Obama Supporters!!!

 

image

From HuffPo

Republican Mitt Romney says a video clip in which he called nearly half of Americans “victims” was “not elegantly stated” and was “spoken off the cuff.” But he says President Barack Obama’s approach is “attractive to people who are not paying taxes.”

The Republican nominee did not disavow the comments but said they were made during a question-and-answer session. He said it was indicative of his campaign’s effort to “focus on the people in the middle.”

 

“There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what,” Romney says in one clip. “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. Who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing.”

This is fascinating.  Someone sneaks a secret video of Romney and it catches him articulating the obvious.  Entitlement recipients are likely Obama supporters.  Of course, the left hates that thought.  But, this is exactly what this election is about. 

Are we, as a nation, going to give in to the allure of entitlements and the thought that government can cure our social and fiscal ills, or, are we, as a nation, going to reject the enslavement of the nanny government and embrace individual achievement?

The faux outrage of the left and their surrogate the LSM means that Romney has struck a chord which is likely to resonate with the freedom loving populace. 

Personally, I give point for Romney on this one.  Unlike his opponent, Barack Hussein Obama,  it demonstrates that he deals with reality.  Expand and expound, Mitt.  This is your campaign!

This entry was posted in News and politics. Bookmark the permalink.

102 Responses to Entitlement Children Hate That They Are Obama Supporters!!!

  1. DirkH says:

    Facepalm. Mother Jones, you’re supposed to work for Obama.

  2. Scott says:

    I actually just increased my respect for Romney. I wasn’t sure if I was going to vote for him before, but after these comments, I’m pretty darn sure. And yes, I’m serious.

    -Scott

  3. kim2ooo says:

    The BEST response to the Romney 47% and Democrats outrage:

    Ha ha ha ha 🙂 Mr Treacher…Pretty well shoots them in the head!
    The Democrats think Romney just self-destructed by pointing out, um, THEIR ENTIRE STRATEGY
    http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/18/democrats-think-romney-just-self-destructed-by-pointing-out-um-their-entire-strategy/

  4. leftinbrooklyn says:

    Thank you, Mitt, for at least forcing their hand to face what this election is really about. Not who’s a racist, who’s gonna put who in chains, what some D-grade video portrays, but: Do we want to live under socialism or not?

    If it turns out that the majority do, then at least, they’ll own it. No more: ‘You guys were racist!’ They must now shout: ‘We were the socialists!” And they will reap what they sow.

    • Jim Masterson says:

      They’ll never own it. Socialism never works, but that’s because (according to leftist) it wasn’t done right. When this round fails and millions die again, it will be the same refrain.

      Jim

      • suyts says:

        Too true. Over and over again. “It didn’t work because it wasn’t done right.”

        • leftinbrooklyn says:

          Well, if it does come, and after it does collapse, then after we bring it back to what should be—-we’ll have to keep reminding them who owns it. They might not hold the presidency again for a 100 years.

        • suyts says:

          Yes, we’ll have to continually remind them of what happened and why.

      • DirkH says:

        The Soviet Union followed Marx’ own definition of socialism.
        http://www.marxmail.org/faq/socialism_and_communism.htm
        “Socialism does not mean taking away the first kind of private property, e.g. your suit of clothes; it does mean taking away the second kind of private property, e.g. your factory for making suits of clothes. It means taking away private property in the means of production from the few so that there will be much more private property in the means of consumption for the many. ”

        Notice also that socialism requires a socialist state, the SU was that; later, magically the state dissolves and communism remains.

        I’d say the SU did everything right. They even dissolved in the end. Yet, no communism popped into existence.

        Back to the drawing board…

  5. DirkH says:

    9 months after filing a FOIA request, Daily Caller gets e-mails between DOJ and Media Matters For America that, according to this :
    http://video.foxnews.com/v/1846477652001/has-the-doj-been-using-media-matters-to-spin-the-press
    prove collusion to spin news stories, e.g. about Fast & Furious.

    • suyts says:

      Yeh, it’s confirmation of what we all knew. The LeftStreamMedia is in the bag for Obama and the Obama administration have no compunction regarding a free and unbiased press.

  6. ThePhDScientist says:

    Wait where are those 47% paying no taxes most heavily found!?! Oh that’s right in the Bible Belt South – Big SURPRISE there!?!? I thought not, either. Looks like those liberal states have the least amount of people not paying any taxes again no surprise.

    That loser Romney is going down in November! 😀

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/where-are-the-47-of-americans-who-pay-no-income-taxes/262499/

    • Scott says:

      That’s an interesting link. Did you read the update quoted below?

      My colleague Derek Thompson picks up the baton from me and digs deeper into the demographics of the so-called 47 percent. One important note he makes is that it’s often the lowest-income people in these red states who are most likely to vote Democratic — it’s just that the rest of the population is conservative enough to carry the states into the Republican column.

      Sure, those conservative states as a whole may have the highest percentage of people not paying taxes, but those non-taxpayers don’t appear to to be voting for Romney anytime soon anyway (see the quantitative numbers from 2008 in your link right after the section I quoted above). I don’t see how this surprises anyone and doesn’t do anything to reject Suyt’s hypothesis…I’d say if anything those numbers actually support it.

      -Scott

      • philjourdan says:

        Don’t confuse phd with facts. It is too much fun to watch him prove your points out of his ignorance.

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          Get back on the treadmill big boy! 😉

        • DirkH says:

          What’s your problem with obesity, Phd? Are the obese not people? Have they no rights?

        • philjourdan says:

          I see I am still in phd’s head. Always there, showing him how childish and racist he is.

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          No you’re not in my head, but clearly I’m in yours as you brought my name up and I clearly didn’t address you! Big Boy! 😉

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          DirkH I don’t hate Obese people, I just hate the sin of gluttony. I believe they should have rights! Of course they can’t redefine marriage – as defined in the Bible a marriage is between a healthy weight man and woman, right!?!

      • ThePhDScientist says:

        Oh silly Scott, Romney is supported by at least 40% of those in the lowest income tax brackets. I actually thought it would be higher! Also wonder what Romney’s support is amongst those with less than high school education, quite high I bet!?! Doesn’t the GOP court the uneducated? This way they can push through all their tax breaks for the wealthy while convincing their constituents that these policies are “good for them” 😀

        • DirkH says:

          I guess you with your Phd in German polka dancing consider yourself one of the educated? How much was it? 100k USD?

        • Scott says:

          Just curious – where do you get the “at least 40%” number (that’s a 100% honest question)? In the 2008 election, President Obama got 70% of the <$30k/yr vote in GA and 66% of that vote in MS. So is Romney doing just that much better than McCain, or are the poor people in DC and Chicago not supporters of the current president? My source for my numbers is here, which you might recognize:

          http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/where-are-the-47-of-americans-who-pay-no-income-taxes/262499/

          -Scott

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          So Scott you’re saying the Republicans get a substantial number of poor voters? Interesting! Guess you’re calling Romney a liar?

        • Scott says:

          Thanks for the link. The critical info for our conversation in your link, in my opinion, was this:

          In 2008, when voter turnout rates were at or around record highs, fewer than half (44.9 percent) of adults in households making less than $30,000 per year voted, according to Census Bureau data. And of those who did vote, a substantial chunk voted for John McCain, the Republican candidate: 25 percent of those making under $15,000, and 37 percent of those making $15,000 to $30,000.

          I don’t quite know what you mean by “Romney is supported”, but in my mind, that means a vote for him. Because the percentage of those who vote and the percentages of the way they voted aren’t binned in the same bins, we can only estimate, but it’s looking like 11% of the <$15k people voted for McCain and 17% of the $15-30k people voted for him.

          So where are you getting "at least 40%"? And you thought it'd be higher than 40%? Why did you think that? The only answer I can come up with is that Romney is doing far better with the poor than McCain did, but somehow I doubt that's the truth. So where did the number come from again?

          Thanks,

          -Scott

    • suyts says:

      Exactly. All this is is whine-bag Obama supporters being shown that they are a bunch of entitlement recipients.

      As a note: Many of the “red state” aid recipients hate the fact that they are receiving aid to put food on the table. Many see it as a degrading humiliation. And many hold Obama as being directly responsible. Were I Romney, I’d tap into that resentment as well.

    • kelly liddle says:

      Well if you have seen the video he had better do some very fast back tracking if he wants to court that 47% who don’t want to be in the 47%. The fact is it is just a stupid statement and many of the 47% are Republican voters just as many of the the other are Democrat voters. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XnB0NZzl5HA Also sounds pretty heartless like he doesn’t even believe in feeding people. If I was in the 47% and aware of the fact I would be very offended because he is claiming that all I want is handouts. To Scotts point often and most likely means not all.

      • suyts says:

        Kelly, there’s nothing in that video that is untrue. And while that wasn’t made for public consumption, there’s nothing to apologize for or backtrack about. It isn’t that he doesn’t believe in feeding people. What he was talking about was the perception of entitlements. He can’t reach the people who believe the government owes them something. This country has become so pussified that people here actually believe the government should take care of them from the cradle to the grave. They are a national embarrassment. The operate under a foundation of belief entirely incompatible with the foundations and principles of this nation.

      • kelly liddle says:

        Suyts
        It is clearly not true otherwise he should just throw in the towel now. First have to change from 47% of people to 47% of people who will vote. Then have to change that percentage as there are definately more than 5% of voting net tax payers (not sure if the 47% is supposed to be net tax payers or those who pay tax) who vote Democrat like PhD does I assume. The idea about many people being like he said is true but the numbers are clearly wrong. It is true in all western democracies.

        • suyts says:

          Kelly, that’s not what he was saying. Don’t get hung up on the numbers. Understand who he was speaking to. It is true that about 47% don’t pay federal income taxes. Yes, you are correct, not all of those people will vote, and of those who do vote, not all will vote Dem.

          What Mitt was saying was that the people who believe in entitlements are not going to be the people who vote for him. There’s nothing he can do about that. And, it is true. He can’t. They’re going to vote left regardless. There’s also about 45% or so who are going to vote the other way. It’s the ones in the middle he needs to get at.

          There’s nothing wrong with what he said. He’s nailed this country’s problem. And, he’s addressing reality.

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          Hahaha many, many of those 47% are seniors (65 and older!) who overwhelmingly vote Republican and live off their entitlements. You’re foolish if you think he didn’t shoot himself in the foot with this comment or that he doesn’t have to be sorry for it.

        • suyts says:

          I don’t think you’re understanding what he was saying. This is what the election is about. Are we, as a nation, going to go down the road of Greece, or are we as a nation, going to, once again, embrace the notion of American industry and exceptionalism.

          Are we going to be an entitlement nation or are we going to go to work?

        • kim2ooo says:

          Hmmm …. I think those over 65 paid taxes – and into their Social Security?

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          It’s great that you inferred that, but that’s not what he actually said. What he did say is that there are 47% of Americans (seniors, military veterans, poor) who pay no taxes and believe they are victims. He’s a scum bag and he’s full of crap, trying to make people believe that all of these 47% are just poor, entitled Democrats who vote for Obama. In fact many of these 47% are Republican voters.

          The reason a lot of these people pay no taxes are because of things like the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit – tax cuts passed with overwhelming bipartisan support. Wasn’t the Earned Income Tax Credit actually created to incentivize people to work and move off welfare. And a wealth of research shows it was successful in doing this.

          The scum bag Romney will go down in November for comments like these. He’s completely out of touch with America and now the whole world knows it!

        • DirkH says:

          “It’s great that you inferred that, but that’s not what he actually said. What he did say is that there are 47% of Americans (seniors, military veterans, poor) who pay no taxes and believe they are victims. He’s a scum bag and he’s full of crap, trying to make people believe that all of these 47% are just poor, entitled Democrats who vote for Obama. In fact many of these 47% are Republican voters.”

          But I thought 99 % are victims in your worldview?
          So you’re saying Romney’s a scumbag because he’s 52% short?

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          The only one talking about victims are you and scum bag Romney Dirky boy!

        • DirkH says:

          For an entire year the occupiers have told everyone how they are the victims of an unjust system and you missed all of that? Police Brutality! Dontcha remember?

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          I don’t remember anyone saying they were victims? They correctly stated that the US government has set up specials rules and legislation for the wealthy 1% and another set for everyone else. That is absolutely correct and abundantly evident!

          It’s the reason Dirk, why myself as a PhD-level scientist and a junior professor pays a higher percentage of my total income to federal tax than Mittens Romney (and his 14%)

        • DirkH says:

          So, tell us. What’s the secret of polka dancing?

        • kim2ooo says:

          DirkH says:
          September 19, 2012 at 10:25 am

          So, tell us. What’s the secret of polka dancing?

          xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

          🙂

        • kim2ooo says:

          It’s prolly not the Polka …it’s the Obama shuffle

        • DirkH says:

          Nice one.

      • DirkH says:

        Did you even listen to the video? He was explaining how he intends to win the election and explained that 47% of voters would probably vote for Obama no matter what. He did NOT, I repeat, NOT propose to let 47% of the population starve to death.

        • kelly liddle says:

          LOL good come back.

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          But Dirk who’s going to be left to vote for the GOP. Romney wipes out 47% of the country and Santorum just admitted SMART PEOPLE are never going to vote Republican. BWAAHAHAHAHAHA!

        • DirkH says:

          “But Dirk who’s going to be left to vote for the GOP. Romney wipes out 47% of the country and Santorum just admitted SMART PEOPLE are never going to vote Republican. ”

          And Obama just told everyone on Letterman that from now on radical muslims would no more harm Americans.

          Thanks Phd for the comic relief.

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          Santorum always makes me laugh hysterically as well! 😉

        • DirkH says:

          No no, I didn’t yet watch the video. You are the comic relief. Thank you for dropping by.

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          Hahaha I didn’t no Germans could be mindless Republican Baggers – you’re trying so hard to fit in with crowd, it’s really cute Dirky Boy!

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          *know

  7. Jim Masterson says:

    It’s a little early for an October surprise in September. I think the Democrats are getting worried and want to stop the actual shift in the polls (not the made up ones). Let’s see if this works to their advantage.

    Jim

  8. Pingback: Lightning Round – 2012/09/19 « Free Northerner

  9. kim2ooo says:

    {“Obama administration officials have insisted that their decision to grant states waivers to redefine work requirements for welfare recipients would not “gut” the landmark 1996 welfare reform law. But a new report from the Congressional Research Service obtained by the Washington Examiner suggests that the administration’s suspension of a separate welfare work requirement has already helped explode the number of able-bodied Americans on food stamps.

    In addition to the broader work requirement that has become a contentious issue in the presidential race, the 1996 welfare reform law included a separate rule encouraging able-bodied adults without dependents to work by limiting the amount of time they could receive food stamps. President Obama suspended that rule when he signed his economic stimulus legislation into law, and the number of these adults on food stamps doubled, from 1.9 million in 2008 to 3.9 million in 2010, according to the CRS report, issued in the form of a memo to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va..”]

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/crs-report-number-of-able-bodied-adults-on-food-stamps-doubled-after-obama-suspended-work-requirement/article/2508430

  10. kim2ooo says:

    [” In last year’s 2012 Index of Dependence on Government, it was reported that 70.5 percent of federal spending goes to dependency creating programs—‘]

    http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/02/2012-index-of-dependence-on-government

    http://blog.heritage.org/2012/09/18/index-of-dependence-on-government-jumps-for-the-fourth-year-in-a-row/

  11. philjourdan says:

    ThePhDScientist says:
    September 19, 2012 at 9:17 am

    I don’t remember anyone saying they were victims? They correctly stated that the US government has set up specials rules and legislation for the wealthy 1% and another set for everyone else. That is absolutely correct and abundantly evident!

    It’s the reason Dirk, why myself as a PhD-level scientist and a junior professor pays a higher percentage of my total income to federal tax than Mittens Romney (and his 14%)

    That is not true on all levels. First, you do not pay less as a percentage. Since the money Romney gets must be taxed at 35% before he even gets to pay 14%. Second, everyone is entitled to pay that 49% – just invest in companies (where virtually all retirements now reside which means about 75% of the population – not 1% – own stock). So there are not different rules for people. The same set of rules.

    There are different outcomes. Stupid people tend to lose money faster than smart people, and can explain why you lose so much so fast.

    • ThePhDScientist says:

      Ahh Big Boy shows how little he knows about the real world. Big Boy look up carried interest and see why Mitt’s money is not taxed at 35% and please don’t try to lecture me on finance when you’re completely clueless. It’s like you’re so in the bag for Mitt you won’t even see reality in front of your face. The carried interest loophole exists because of the legion of finance lobbyists that have taken over DC.

      So yes, the REAL TRUTH of the matter is that Mitt paid a total federal income tax rate of just under 14% which is slightly less than I paid (and yet he earns almost 200X more than i do per year).

      • DirkH says:

        Profits of companies are taxed. After this taxation dividends are paid. These dividends are taxed again.

        Was that simple enough?

      • DirkH says:

        Oh, I see. That looks indeed like a loophole.

        Why hasn’t Obama not closed it while he was in control of both houses, PhDScientist?

      • philjourdan says:

        Try picking up an Econ 101 text book, and then a copy of the US Tax Code. The money Romney gets IS taxed at 35%. It is not carried interest. It is capital gains (try learning the difference). And lecture you on finance? How could I? You have no concept of economics! You have to learn to crawl before you can learn to run, and you are still belly flopping across the floor.

        So the real truth is that yes, the check written by Romney was 13.9%. And the real truth is that the money was taxed at 35% BEFORE he had to write the check. then was taxed at another 15%. So with his few deductions, he managed to SAVE 1.1% of the tax! Shazaam! If your total deductions save you ONLY 1.1%, you either have a terrible accountant, or are a complete incompetent when it comes to doing taxes. Given your childish rantings, we can infer which is true.

        And based upon your competency and intelligence, I dare say that everyone on this board earns 200x what you do. If not for Obama and welfare, you would be begging on a street corner.

        BTW: While he earned scarcely 50x what I did, I paid a smaller percentage than he did. I know how to take advantage of tax laws. That is in INCOME taxes. Not ALL taxes.

  12. philjourdan says:

    ThePhDScientist says:
    September 19, 2012 at 9:21 am

    Santorum always makes me laugh hysterically as well! 😉

    You have demonstrated you need no excuse to be hysterical.

  13. gator69 says:

    OT – Anyone had an update on Obama’s nephew? You know, the nephew who was gravely ill and had his urgent medical care paid for by Dinesh D’souza, because as Obama’s own brother said, he could not turn anywhere else. Makes you feel all warm and extended family-like.

    Also, has anyone seen the pictures of Barry with Beyonce and Jay-Z? I hear he gave a riveting speech while standing next to a golden sculpture of Champagne bottles. Maybe Netanyahu will get an autographed copy, along with an iPod for Ramadan!

    I’m sure the MSM will give us an update on both those stories tonight.

    Hopey Changey!

  14. philjourdan says:

    ThePhDScientist says:
    September 19, 2012 at 1:27 pm

    No you’re not in my head, but clearly I’m in yours as you brought my name up and I clearly didn’t address you! Big Boy! 😉

    I responded to a stupid statement you made. I did not bring you up where you had not commented. That is the difference between me being in your head (where you have to bring me up even when I do not comment on a thread) and me responding to one of your immature rants.

    I see you are still ESL. They have adult ed classes in that.

  15. philjourdan says:

    ThePhDScientist says:
    September 20, 2012 at 6:50 am

    Hahaha I didn’t no Germans could be mindless Republican Baggers – you’re trying so hard to fit in with crowd, it’s really cute Dirky Boy!

    You “no” a lot, but you do not “know” much.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s