Why isn't Romney saying this? I just don't understand how he expects to get elected, especially after his choice of Ryan as running mate. Instead, we've heard Obama say (on multiple occasions) that well-to-do people like himself don't need a massive tax cut. I'll "cut to the chase:" if you want to "reform" medicare and social security without losing the election badly, why not say that rich people do not need these programs, so the way to reform them is to have wealthy people continue to pay into them yet not receive any benefits unless they become destitute in a documentable way (in other words, not a scam)? I can understand a rich person saying that social security should be just that, and that those who can clearly afford to obtain private medical coverage and pay their bills don't need it, or social security. The way things stand, he seems to hope that he can treat the entire nation the way he did many of the employees of some of companies Bain took over (remember what he said about letting foreclosures continue so that rich people can buy the houses and rent them out; nobody in the media, to my knowledge, ever asked him who was going to be able to afford the kind of rent people like Romney would want to charge them!).
Is it that Romney wants to scrape up every last crumb he can get from the government? This is what infuriates me about the Romney campaign, which is that it's almost like they expect to win an election by saying, essentially, "screw the '99%.'" Don't you have to at least "throw a bone" to the non-super-wealthy? Instead of giving the public some sort Republican version of a "Sister Souljah moment," we get Montgomery Burns from the Simpsons stealing a piece of candy out of baby Maggie's hands !
I've always been an independent (3 decades), but I can't remember a time when an election has provided me with basically no choice. There's no proverbial fig leaf to the Romney campaign. Unlike some previous Republican candidates, who liked to harken back to the supposedly wonderful 1950s, Romney seems to want to return us to the 1850s (with "wage slavery" replacing literal slavery). Please, can someone explain how this man, who said he only wants to talk about tax policy in hushed tones and in back rooms expects to get elected? Doesn't he realize that when he makes such comments it only begs the question, who is going to be in that back room and who is going to be doing most of the talking? This guy makes "W." look like a political genius (or perhaps a genius, in general) !