I went looking this morning for fallout from the latest Romney disaster.
I found a fresh thread by one of the honchos there, Erick Erickson, "Conservatives Agree: Romney's Right" I was right that there would be some good responses by now but Erick's title was not correct.
There are 3 comments from the same man and 4 representative responses.
Threre may be some picking for us from those 47%ers over there once they figure out they are in the 47% Romney despises.
1. I'm going to say this one time only, Erick. You are not poor. Ben is not poor. And given the statements that have been made, neither one of you has taken the time to find out how people who are poor might be looking at this situation. Don't even try to tell me that someone who is poor, due more to current economic circumstances than for any other reason, isn't going to take Romney's comments personally. We do. My wage statement for last year was less than 10K. I managed to save enough money, bought a business license, purchased some supplies, and I peddle hand-made crafts on a street corner in my neighborhood every other month or so, trying to change my own circumstances rather than becoming dependent on government. Hell, yeah, I take it personally!!!
I have a president who would just as soon that people like myself become entirely dependent on government, which I do not want to see happen, and now I have R candidate who says it is not his job to worry about people like me. And I should be just hunky-dory peachy-keen fine-and-dandy that this is the kind of attitude he is displaying?
I understand the political position you're taking, but don't make the mistake of overlooking the bottom line of people who actually vote, including those of us who are poor and don't want to go on being poor for the rest of our days, in the process.
Romney is wrong. If he is to be the President of the US, then it is part of his job to worry about all of us. We don't need another "special interest" President, Erick.
2.The MSM is spinning what he said into something different..."who are with him, 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 health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That, that’s an entitlement, and the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what" - he is talking about the people who are dependent on the government & happy about being dependent on the government - those folks are going to break against him not for him. You are fighting to stay out of government dependency. The best option for you is Mitt Romney because he is interested in growing the economy not government dependency. We all need the guy looking for a rising tide that lifts all boats, not the guy telling us there is hidden treasure in a sunk ship.
3. That's great that you are trying to better your circumstances, and no offense intended, but it still isn't fair that those of us that make good money and pay taxes should have to support those who don't pay federal income taxes. It's unfortunate that you are lumped in with the rest of the 47%, but it's a fact. There are Takers and there are Makers. One group supports the other. Thank God Romney not only believes this truth but is also speaking it in public and defending his statements. This is one reason why I've been a staunch supporter of his for a long time (despite some of the anti-Romney invective I've seen here on RS). I'm sure Erick and Ben aren't poor, but let's not denigrate them either for their success (I'm not saying you're doing that). I'm successful too through a lot of hard work and a great education, and all I do is keep giving and giving and giving via involuntary bi-weekly deductions from my paycheck. It's not fair that 53% of us should have to support the other 47%. Let's not be squishy here. If the 47% want help, they need to hit up a local charitable organization for help. That's what I'd do.
4. Follow up to 1
You aren't telling my anything I don't already know by saying that my best option is Romney. I know that.
But doubling down on comments indicating that Romney himself doesn't see those of us in the kind of situation I'm facing right now (and there are a LOT of us out here) as being part of his responsibility if he is elected President is downright foolish.
Of course people in that kind of situation are going to take Romney's comments personally. They'd be less than human if they didn't. Many of us are struggling just to survive as it is. And some of us are doing what we can with what little means, abilities and talents we have to accept responsibility for our circumstances.
I can't believe that we have not only a candidate who is tone-deaf to that demographic of people in our nation but also, apparently, many pundits on the right who are tone-deaf as well. It ticks me off to no end.
5. You are buying the spin. Did Romney say he didn't care about those in your circumstance? Even saying there are people who won't vote for him doesn't mean he would not, as President, care about their situation. Any Conservative would believe the same thing that Reagan believed, a rising (economic) tide lifts all boats. Romney intends to cause the economic tide to rise (not lower sea levels). My record on RS shows that I've not been a huge fan of Romney, but I think your apparent belief in (or at least repeating of) the Democrat/Obama/MSM spin (now I'm really repeating myself) does a disservice to Romney and also Conservatives.
6. Follow up to 4
Go back and look at this comments yourself. Better yet, I'll post them here, then I have to go to work.
"These are people who pay no income tax… my job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."
I know that he probably didn't mean for it to come across in the manner that it did. I know that. I also know that Romney is my best choice.
But you have to be realistic in evaluating this in the context of how it will be PERCEIVED. He's said it isn't his job to worry about 47%ers. He's wrong. No President of the US (or candidate for that office) should ever say that it isn't his job to concern himself about a sector of citizens in this country. Ever.
7. The main problem with his 47% comment is that he doesn't seem to know who the people are who don't pay any federal income tax in this country.
- They are seniors who paid into social security and medicare throughout their working lives.
- They are working poor who make $7 an hour and often have to take multiple jobs to make ends meet.
- Many of them are Republican voters.
Relatively few are the stereotype welfare teens who crank out babies for benefits, sell their food stamps to buy booze, etc. I imagine that this is the population that Mitt Romney was really addressing, and this is a problem that is actually worth talking about and trying to solve. He just needs to do it without saying things that are offensive and untrue about the rest of the 47%.