Mitt Romney blames the "victims"

[Willie Escalade]

Yes...I know this belongs in the political forum. I'm placing it HERE first because I want folks to check it out before it's moved.

http://eclectablog.com/2012/09/mitt-romney-blames-the-victims.html

One of the comments from this post stated this.

"'Keep taking from those making it and soon there will be fewer of them to take from.' That's EXACTLY what is happening, the rich keep taking it from the working class, and now that there are fewer to take it from, they blame them. It's akin to the clouds refusing to rain and complaining that there is a drought and therefore a lack of evaporation. Holding mass amounts of money and keeping it from cycling in our economy is destroying our country. No money in the hands of millions means no demand, no demand means no jobs, no jobs means more welfare, what's so hard to understand about that?

A man wanting to provide for his family is not greedy. A man holding billions and talking down to half of America IS."

Fucking brilliant.

[danthepoetman]

Great post, Willie. It’s disgusting, the way that man thinks. And yet you can’t get over the feeling that he only expressed the very mentality that drives the Republican party today. I just don’t understand how it is that people don’t understand the political dynamic at play, here, how it is that they either keep electing a Republican president or either a Democrat without the representatives to back him up in both chambers, to allow some changes to take place.
At least, you can say something for Romney: he straight talked at the very least once, and we had the fortune to have it captured…

[Prospero]

Latest polls suggest that not only is Obama likely to win the presidency but that the democrats might also win control of both houses. They maybe the deadlock that has blocked things since the mid term elections will be removed and he can get on with what needs doing without Republican obstructionism (which then translates into blaming Obama for "his" failures.)

[wearboots4me]

Romney is a jerkoff. :jerkoff

[danthepoetman]

Latest polls suggest that not only is Obama likely to win the presidency but that the democrats might also win control of both houses. They maybe the deadlock that has blocked things since the mid term elections will be removed and he can get on with what needs doing without Republican obstructionism (which then translates into blaming Obama for "his" failures.)
Maybe Romney has been sent by God after all...

[Prospero]

Sent by the Angel Moroni perhaps

[MdR Dave]

I keep waiting for Mormonism to come up.

[youngblood61]

Maybe Romney has been sent by God after all...That's funny.:)

[dabaldone]

I keep waiting for Mormonism to come up.

Same here MdR Dave, that religion is just plain whacko. But most religions are whacko as well.

[Merkurie]

Yes...I know this belongs in the political forum. I'm placing it HERE first because I want folks to check it out before it's moved.

http://eclectablog.com/2012/09/mitt-romney-blames-the-victims.html

One of the comments from this post stated this.

"'Keep taking from those making it and soon there will be fewer of them to take from.' That's EXACTLY what is happening, the rich keep taking it from the working class, and now that there are fewer to take it from, they blame them. It's akin to the clouds refusing to rain and complaining that there is a drought and therefore a lack of evaporation. Holding mass amounts of money and keeping it from cycling in our economy is destroying our country. No money in the hands of millions means no demand, no demand means no jobs, no jobs means more welfare, what's so hard to understand about that?

A man wanting to provide for his family is not greedy. A man holding billions and talking down to half of America IS."

Fucking brilliant.
Please post this everywhere you can.
This is the whole economic problem in a nutshell. I cant for the life of me see why people cant get this idea through their heads.

[flabbybody]

I think about my little world of family and friends and find it funny that the biggest Romney supporters are themselves in the 47% safety net that he despises.
So many people I know get to see doctors because of their Medicare coverage. They collect public pension benefits that they never contributed to. They have a disabled child getting financial assistant via a Medicaid benefit program. Maybe because they're white and middle class they just don't see themselves as takers.
But Lord do they go on about that damned Obama and the illegals who take our jobs. Its got to the point that I've banned political discussions from family get togethers. If people are feeble minded and uninformed I don't want to hear it over my brisket and mashed potatoes.

[trish]

Republicans believe down is up!!

The whole trickle down theory is constructed on a metaphor...the metaphor of gravity. The wealthy are high above us in the mountains and the clouds and their money will fall downward the way raindrops trickle down or the way streams flow along gradients.

But let's think about this metaphor. How does gravity work in real life. Massive objects attract less massive objects. The Sun pulls the Earth. The Earth attracts pennies, which is why they fall from your hand when released. Yes money does indeed flow along a gradient, just like water does. But in the case of the economy it's wealth and power that attract wealth and power. Just as planets and stars gravitationally accrete matter, powerful and wealthy families and corporations accrete wealth and power by attracting wealth and power. Money flows from customers into the pockets of stockholders, not the other way around. Without regulation huge fortunes come to resemble black holes that literally pull money out of your pocket as you walk past them. If you live in a rural town, did you ever wonder what happened to all the little stores and shops that used to inhabit your town square? That money is now in the form of Wallmart stock and it's accruing more money as we speak, and the capital gains earned by the stockholder's is taxed at a lesser rate than the wages laborers earn by working hard. Wealthy families and corporations are the heavy institutions. They sit in the valley. We live in the hills. It's our money that rolls down into their safes and vaults.

But in the world of the Reaganites, down is up and up is down.

If you want sound economic policy, don't vote for the trickle down guys. They're just totally confused.

[BluegrassCat]

Republicans believe down is up!!

The whole trickle down theory is constructed on a metaphor...the metaphor of gravity. The wealthy are high above us in the mountains and the clouds and their money will fall downward the way raindrops trickle down or the way streams flow along gradients.

But let's think about this metaphor. How does gravity work in real life. Massive objects attract less massive objects. The Sun pulls the Earth. The Earth attracts pennies, which is why they fall from your hand when released. Yes money does indeed flow along a gradient, just like water does. But in the case of the economy it's wealth and power that attract wealth and power. Just as planets and stars gravitationally accrete matter, powerful and wealthy families and corporations accrete wealth and power by attracting wealth and power. Money flows from customers into the pockets of stockholders, not the other way around. Without regulation huge fortunes come to resemble black holes that literally pull money out of your pocket as you walk past them. If you live in a rural town, did you ever wonder what happened to all the little stores and shops that used to inhabit your town square? That money is now in the form of Wallmart stock and it's accruing more money as we speak, and the capital gains earned by the stockholder's is taxed at a lesser rate than the wages laborers earn by working hard. Wealthy families and corporations are the heavy institutions. They sit in the valley. We live in the hills. It's our money that rolls down into their safes and vaults.

But in the world of the Reaganites, down is up and up is down.

If you want sound economic policy, don't vote for the trickle down guys. They're just totally confused.

:claps:claps:claps:claps

[MacShreach]

Republicans believe down is up!!

The whole trickle down theory is constructed on a metaphor...the metaphor of gravity. The wealthy are high above us in the mountains and the clouds and their money will fall downward the way raindrops trickle down or the way streams flow along gradients.

But let's think about this metaphor. How does gravity work in real life. Massive objects attract less massive objects. The Sun pulls the Earth. The Earth attracts pennies, which is why they fall from your hand when released. Yes money does indeed flow along a gradient, just like water does. But in the case of the economy it's wealth and power that attract wealth and power. Just as planets and stars gravitationally accrete matter, powerful and wealthy families and corporations accrete wealth and power by attracting wealth and power. Money flows from customers into the pockets of stockholders, not the other way around. Without regulation huge fortunes come to resemble black holes that literally pull money out of your pocket as you walk past them. If you live in a rural town, did you ever wonder what happened to all the little stores and shops that used to inhabit your town square? That money is now in the form of Wallmart stock and it's accruing more money as we speak, and the capital gains earned by the stockholder's is taxed at a lesser rate than the wages laborers earn by working hard. Wealthy families and corporations are the heavy institutions. They sit in the valley. We live in the hills. It's our money that rolls down into their safes and vaults.

But in the world of the Reaganites, down is up and up is down.

If you want sound economic policy, don't vote for the trickle down guys. They're just totally confused.
Beautifully put, Trish. Best demolition of trickle-down I have heard.

[trish]

Hi MacShreach, haven't seen you for awhile...that or I just haven't been paying attention. In any case, good to see you again.

[MacShreach]

Hi MacShreach, haven't seen you for awhile...that or I just haven't been paying attention. In any case, good to see you again.

Hi Trish! Great to see you too. Been very busy and only dropping in occasionally to lurk...Very remiss and it's bad manners to treat friends that way but I am sure you know how HA can, shall we say, occupy more than its allotted time? Apologies to you all.

[GroobySteven]

I keep waiting for Mormonism to come up.

I don't know why people aren't making more of this? I'd question any leader who is devoutly religious but their cult is one of the stranger ones.

[fred41]

I don't know why people aren't making more of this? I'd question any leader who is devoutly religious but their cult is one of the stranger ones.

Probably because he was born into it. It may or may not really mean anything to him anymore, but his family is rooted into it...and that's where his wealth comes from...so.

On another note...they all seem like cults to me now. I used to be religious...then agnostic...then religious again. Now I'm totally atheist and it all seems totally ridiculous to me. All of it.
Mormonism seems more ridiculous because the closer time span makes it easier to disprove...so it seems you'd have to be stupid to believe in it, but I think, like many religions...it's more about power and social networking.

To me, actual belief seems silly...like believing in ghosts.



(that being said, I never understood dabblers either ..."I believe in ancient written scriptures...but only the parts I have the will to follow"...what's the point?)

Anyway..rant over....back to the thread...sorry.

[dabaldone]

I think about my little world of family and friends and find it funny that the biggest Romney supporters are themselves in the 47% safety net that he despises.
So many people I know get to see doctors because of their Medicare coverage. They collect public pension benefits that they never contributed to. They have a disabled child getting financial assistant via a Medicaid benefit program. Maybe because they're white and middle class they just don't see themselves as takers.
But Lord do they go on about that damned Obama and the illegals who take our jobs. Its got to the point that I've banned political discussions from family get togethers. If people are feeble minded and uninformed I don't want to hear it over my brisket and mashed potatoes.

This is what I simply cannot understand. How the hell can people vote against their own interests?

[GroobySteven]

I'm thinking about starting a Church of Atheism. It would be good for the tax breaks. I'd even open schools which would only teach religion as history and the Darwin's Fact of Evolution (stop calling it a theory!).
We'd meet every Friday around tea time for Happy Hour and discuss how to make the world a better place - and then go on a pub crawl.

[fred41]

I'm thinking about starting a Church of Atheism. It would be good for the tax breaks. I'd even open schools which would only teach religion as history and the Darwin's Fact of Evolution (stop calling it a theory!).
We'd meet every Friday around tea time for Happy Hour and discuss how to make the world a better place - and then go on a pub crawl.

You mean this ? - http://firstchurchofatheism.com/

[MacShreach]

I'm thinking about starting a Church of Atheism. It would be good for the tax breaks. I'd even open schools which would only teach religion as history and the Darwin's Fact of Evolution (stop calling it a theory!).
We'd meet every Friday around tea time for Happy Hour and discuss how to make the world a better place - and then go on a pub crawl.

It's okay to call it a theory; that does not imply that there is any question about its basis in fact. Evolution is a fact; Darwin's theory explains it, is testable and predictable and fits all the known data. The problem is those who don't understand, or pretend not to understand, the difference between a theory and a hypothesis. I know what you mean though, it is bloody annoying.

[GrimFusion]

Latest polls suggest that not only is Obama likely to win the presidency but that the democrats might also win control of both houses. They maybe the deadlock that has blocked things since the mid term elections will be removed and he can get on with what needs doing without Republican obstructionism (which then translates into blaming Obama for "his" failures.)


^^ Check the quoted post. ^^

Don't get me wrong, it has been a challenge for Obama to pass any democratic policy though the trammeled Republican majority congress, but he's done plenty of continued wrongdoings by supporting many of Bush's previously enacted policies when he had the option to modify or simply not sign them back into effect. His promises to end "the war(s)" have been an outright lie. Defense budget spending and national security have increased further eroding our constitutional rights as American citizens.

I'm not saying Obama hasn't done America any good. Only that his motives are just as murky as any modern president; Bush included.

[Ben]

I assumed Romney was a moderate. I mean, he could be placating his donors and, too, his base.
I mean, does he himself have moderate positions or extremist positions or is he merely an opportunist?
I mean, politics is acting. So maybe he's one hell of an actor.
And, too, I'm not entirely sure why he's running for President. Frankly, I don't get it. I mean, he's turning 66 next year. He's in his twilight years. He's got all the money in the world.
Does he merely like the conniving aspect of politics? Or maybe he likes raising money? Or the power? Or he likes the aspect of serving the corporate super-rich?

[trish]

I think he's running because he's needy. He requires more than the approval of his family, friends and church. He wants your approval. He wants the approval of the tea-party. He wants the approval of the republican party. He wants the approval of Boston's progressives. He wants God's approval. He wants to be president for the same reason he wanted to be the class president. He needs universal approval. He'll say what he needs to, to get approval. He is the most needy man in the world. Of course, I may be wrong...he may be the most greedy man in the world :)

[GrimFusion]

I assumed Romney was a moderate. I mean, he could be placating his donors and, too, his base.
I mean, does he himself have moderate positions or extremist positions or is he merely an opportunist?
I mean, politics is acting. So maybe he's one hell of an actor.
And, too, I'm not entirely sure why he's running for President. Frankly, I don't get it. I mean, he's turning 66 next year. He's in his twilight years. He's got all the money in the world.
Does he merely like the conniving aspect of politics? Or maybe he likes raising money? Or the power? Or he likes the aspect of serving the corporate super-rich?

Are you kidding? He's absolutely an opportunist.
Bane Capital essentially bought business', optimized them for profit efficiency, and sold them some number of years later. Profit efficiency includes lay-off's, job duty consolidation, lower hiring wages, lower working wages, higher turn-over, fewer benefits to employees, morale decline, and lower product or service quality. American jobs about suck these days because of the actions of Bane Capital among a myriad of other investment companies. He spent most of a decade professionally exploiting the American working-class. I'd say that makes him an opportunist.

Politics is acting as most involved have to focus on filtering what they say. Not just for purposes of implication, but to avoid upsetting public opinion as well. Romney's ability to save-face blows goats for quarters; but before it was Romney, it was Santorum and a long list of other politicians with foot-in-mouth disorder. That's half of the job, though. It's a little insane to think that any president would need to have a honed ability to lie to the public, but it's absolutely essential because nobody would vote for a president who is honest and transparent, no matter whether conservative or liberal.

[GroobySteven]

You mean this ? - http://firstchurchofatheism.com/

Nice - I'm doing it.
I'll be available for weddings soon!

[SFTB]

He spent most of a decade professionally exploiting the American working-class. I'd say that makes him an opportunist.
.

Okay, enough. I'll try to make it simple. Really simple.
Obama has run the deficit to the 16-17 trillion mark in less than 4 yrs.
The inflation alone is killing the American working class.
If you think 4 more years of him is good for the working class, please by all means vote for him.
Those people you cry for on fixed incomes, and assistance, they might think their voting someone who will champion them, but what do you thinks going to happen when those SNAP cards cant buy enough to fill the fridge?

Georgia Runs Out of Food Stamps! - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ufk7IXdxc-c)

[Ben]

Okay, enough. I'll try to make it simple. Really simple.
Obama has run the deficit to the 16-17 trillion mark in less than 4 yrs.
The inflation alone is killing the American working class.
If you think 4 more years of him is good for the working class, please by all means vote for him.
Those people you cry for on fixed incomes, and assistance, they might think their voting someone who will champion them, but what do you thinks going to happen when those SNAP cards cant buy enough to fill the fridge?

Georgia Runs Out of Food Stamps! - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ufk7IXdxc-c)

Only one President, Bill Clinton, tackled the deficit in the last 35 years. But he did it on the backs of working people. Plus he made capital more mobile. With NAFTA and free trade "agreements" with China. Hence hurting working people.
The financialization of the economy means vast sums of cash go to a tiny few. It's designed that way. Which makes sense. From Mitt's own perspective. I mean, all this financialization of the economy has been normalized. Free trade has been normalized etc., etc.
I mean, NAFTA harmed and harms the population. It's fantastic for Mitt and his buddies. But harmful for working people.
But corporate and state structures don't take into account the harm they'll cause. Nor should they. It's purely selfish. It's rational.
I mean, capital investment is about making capital, more capital and more and more. Not to say: make the lives of working Americans happier and healthier and a little less stressful -- ha ha ha!
The reason we have a deficit is because of our bloated military budget and our inefficient health care system. Fix that. And you'll have a budgetary surplus.

Bill Clinton remarks on the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement 1993 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQQ5QXwKwI8)

[BluegrassCat]

The inflation alone is killing the American working class.


LOL. Might as well say Bengal Tigers alone are killing the American working class.

[Merkurie]

Ben has it right.
The financialzation of the economy, which thrived as a manufacturing economy, has destroyed the working class. It is great for fund managers and investors, but it sucks balls for people who earn a paycheck (white and blue collar btw).

Romney did not start this, his own father's company American Motors was an early victim. But he came along at a time where he got to ride the wave for his benefit. Mitt Romney sees nothing wrong with how the system works, it is his system. If you fail it is your fault. Too bad not even sad about it.

Mitt could not run a business (ie an ongoing operation designed to make goods for sale) to save his life. But he can run a business like that into the ground and make himself and his partners loads of money.

And that is what he will do for you as President.

As for Obama, he had a mandate from the people to make the system work for them. He may not have seceded, but he did not even try.

[GrimFusion]

Okay, enough. I'll try to make it simple. Really simple.
Obama has run the deficit to the 16-17 trillion mark in less than 4 yrs.
The inflation alone is killing the American working class.
If you think 4 more years of him is good for the working class, please by all means vote for him.
Those people you cry for on fixed incomes, and assistance, they might think their voting someone who will champion them, but what do you thinks going to happen when those SNAP cards cant buy enough to fill the fridge?

Georgia Runs Out of Food Stamps! - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ufk7IXdxc-c)

Romney's answer to that is deregulating corporate policy while minimizing contributions to government social programs over time. The hope is that corporations that make more money are going to hire more people and create jobs. Riiiight. Let's turn job growth into a system modeled after the trickle-down financial system of the 1980's. That'll work to relieve public dependency on social programs, right guys? In other words, people STILL run out of food stamps, it just takes longer and the government gets to point the finger at corporations instead of taking the credit. That's way better than running up the national debt more. </sarcasm>

[nycguy1]

Flip Flopney's delusional economic plan features the legitimate rape of the middle class through $2,500.00 tax increase, so he can redistribute the wealth to the 1% through 25% tax decreases of $250,000.00. Followed by the creation of 12 million jobs, in China. Join Homer and Ned who just got outsourced!

http://youtu.be/CINZhtB2aHU

[Ben]

How the Mitt Romney video killed the American Dream:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/21/mitt-romney-video-killed-american-dream

[natina]

YOU GOT TO,YOU MUST LISTEN TO at least the last video

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/20/1134497/-Fox-News-is-about-to-erupt

[fred41]

Nice - I'm doing it.
I'll be available for weddings soon!

I'm in.

[fred41]

...well maybe not....site's kinda vague.

[sp fan]

willie there is no difference btw obama and rom. They are twins.

[Prospero]

sp fan - hardly..... look at the promised policies of Romney and despair

[SFTB]

sp fan - hardly..... look at the promised policies of Romney and despair

Damn Prospero, you must be the easiest lay in the world. Someone comes by with dark skin and pretty words and you have stars in your eyes! Please show where Obama has deviated from Bush's foreign policies, hell, he's expanded on them. We now have our hands in even more foreign pies than ever. How does that ever work out for us? What about domestic policy? Nope, same but more of. Bigger deficit.

But , he does go on "The View" and say pretty words about gay marriage.

Oh Romney, despair, lol. Wipe the stars out of your eyes!

[Prospero]

Deviated/ Okay - pulling troops home from Iraq. Not invading any new countries... attempting to build bridges with with Muslim world. How exactly has he expanded them - with the exception of focusing resources to try and sort out the mess of Afghanistan (which might have been sorted sooner if your boy Bush had not got distracted and gone into Iraq.)

A short and simple response to a totally simplistic remark.

Stars in my eyes. I don't think so. It's that I would rather see you elect a man who is trying t do something worthwhile while being blocked by the increasingly right-wing GOp as opposed to your puppet of the radical right. Get the turds out of your eyes and see some facts.

And your remarks about dark skin are offensive and racist.

[SFTB]

attempting to build bridges with with Muslim world. How exactly has he expanded them .

Maybe the most delusional thing you've ever said. The funny thing is if we had a Republican Prez actively participating in toppling governments in Lybia and encouraging revolution in Syria you'd all be marching in the streets.

[Prospero]

Hmmm.... so ousting Gaddafy was a bad thing then? (offering NATO air cover to a popular revolution already underway) and offering just a little support covertly to the people who are trying to do the same in Syria where the dictator uses modern airpower and tanks to slaughter thousands people in their homes and in the streets? That is a world of difference from the illegal invasion of a sovereign state (Iraq) where there was no such popular uprising and which, to this day, has never really been explained after the lies of WMD were proved to be that - lies.

[SFTB]

Hmmm.... so ousting Gaddafy was a bad thing then? (offering NATO air cover to a popular revolution already underway) and offering just a little support covertly to the people who are trying to do the same in Syria where the dictator uses modern airpower and tanks to slaughter thousands people in their homes and in the streets? That is a world of difference from the illegal invasion of a sovereign state (Iraq) where there was no such popular uprising and which, to this day, has never really been explained after the lies of WMD were proved to be that - lies.

Did you just justify Obama meddling in the internal affairs of another country?

[Prospero]

I justified the involvement of Nato, including the US, when invited by the insurgents attempting to overthow a dictator - yes. Meddling no. I would accept such behaviour by Romney were he President if the situation were comparable. I don't beleive in an isolationist policy by the US.

[SFTB]

I justified the involvement of Nato, including the US, when invited by the insurgents attempting to overthow a dictator - yes. Meddling no. I would accept such behaviour by Romney were he President if the situation were comparable. I don't beleive in an isolationist policy by the US.

Funny how its ok with Obama being "invited" by insurgents.

Have another sip of KoolAid and explain how Bush's TARP and Obama's QE3 are any different. Actually with Obama's QE3 being open ended we could definitely argue that he has expanded on Bush's domestic money policy, to eternity. ( The Fed buying up troubled banks mortgages, I wonder who benefits from that?)

And while your at it go ahead and polish up on Obama signing the NDAA, you'll be quizzed on how Obama has not only continued the Patriot Act of Bush years but expanded on the Govt's police powers.

[loveboof]

SFTB, sounds like you're definitely not a fan of Bush! What do you think Romney is going to do if he gains power?

[SFTB]

SFTB, sounds like you're definitely not a fan of Bush! What do you think Romney is going to do if he gains power?

Please let's not misdirect. We are waiting for Prospero to do some more research, finish making another pitcher of KoolAid, and then address yet more expansion of Bush policies under Obama.

[Prospero]

The issue actually is Romney. Bush is - thank god - dead in the water.

please enlighten me regarding the acronyms in your last post but one?

[ed_jaxon]

We are not done with Bush.

[Prospero]

"Stop arguing with idiots. You are not going to change their view."

That's a motto I need to take to heart....

[loveboof]

Please let's not misdirect. We are waiting for Prospero to do some more research, finish making another pitcher of KoolAid, and then address yet more expansion of Bush policies under Obama.

Oh ok, well that's fine... When you're done with that though, who is it you actually support if you dislike Bush policies under Obama?

Are you complaining that Obama is too Republican? Will Romney have any better ideas?

Cos at the moment it sounds like you're just messing with Prospero :/

[trish]

Seems like SFTB is dead set against all Bush era policies. Sounds like a good argument against let's-invade-iran-Romney and his friend trickle-down-Ryan.

[natina]

[I]n a 2007 interview with Glenn Beck, Romney called the fact that people without insurance were able to get "free care" in emergency rooms "a form of socialism.""When they show up at the hospital, they get care. They get free care paid for by you and me. If that's not a form of socialism, I don't know what is," he said at the time. "So my plan did something quite different. It said, you know what? If people can afford to buy insurance ... or if they can pay their own way, then they either buy that insurance or pay their own way, but they no longer look to government to hand out free care. And that, in my opinion, is ultimate conservativism."
Mitt Romney, Sunday night on 60 Minutes (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57518495/campaign-2012-obama-vs-romney/?tag=contentMain;contentBody).

Pelley: Does the government have a responsibility to provide health care to the 50 million Americans who don't have it today?Romney: Well, we do provide care for people who don't have insurance, people-- we-- if someone has a heart attack, they don't sit in their apartment and die. We pick them up in an ambulance, and take them to the hospital, and give them care. And different states have different ways of providing for that care.
Pelley: That's the most expensive way to do it. [...]
Romney: Different, again, different states have different ways of doing that. Some provide that care through clinics. Some provide the care through emergency rooms. In my state, we found a solution that worked for my state. But I wouldn't take what we did in Massachusetts and say to Texas, "You've got to take the Massachusetts model."
Does Romney know better? Of course he does. He knows sending people to the emergency room and hit-or-miss free clinics isn't a system. That's why Romneycare exists. That's why he was defending his plan in terms Glenn Beck would understand—calling having emergency room care as the last resort for millions "socialism."
Now it's apparently an adequate health care system for every state except Massachusetts. Wanker.
7:54 AM PT (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/24/1135791/-Romney-s-no-health-care-reformer-anymore#20120924075438): Double wanker, if that's possible.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/24/1135791/-Romney-s-no-health-care-reformer-anymore

[ghbryans1]

I'd love to see you guys dissect Obama similarly.

[flabbybody]

The one quality that I respected in Mitt Romney was a calculated competency that he could bring to the debate... the kind of CEO enginuity of a Steve Jobs who might have fresh alternatives for a broken political system.

but as it turns out, he's pretty dumb

[danthepoetman]

"Stop arguing with idiots. You are not going to change their view."

That's a motto I need to take to heart....
Here what comes to the mind of an old guy…
“But what a fool believes he sees
No wise man has the power
to reason away…”
Doobie Brothers - What A Fool Believes - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDLVHLomaUw&feature=fvst)

[robertlouis]

I'd love to see you guys dissect Obama similarly.

No, with Obama it would be vivisection. Romney would be dissection. He's dead in the water.

[danthepoetman]

But in the end, with Romney, who cares about the depth when you can so obviously see how bad it already is on the surface, if you know what I mean… Is there any real depth anyways…? The rich are the winners who should run the country, the rest are poor, and besides that, losers, who are essentially trying to take advantage… Seems simple enough not to have to go further to me.

[Ben]

Reagan, by today's Republican standards, is a, well, Liberal....

Reagan--No Loopholes For Millionaires - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgbJ-Fs1ikA)

And in the 1940s he was a left-leaning looney:

Ronald Reagan LIBERAL DEMOCRAT. - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3O-szw3Tx4)

[danthepoetman]

Two very impressive videos, Ben.
What happened to Reagan as he was aging? The Reagan from the 40s strangely sounds like someone penetrated with the Christian values of empathy and charity, and ready to see these put in practice at the political level. Has he became a Christian in church from a Christian in heart?…

[robertlouis]

Reagan, by today's Republican standards, is a, well, Liberal....



....which must make Eisenhower a raving communist.

[Ben]

Two very impressive videos, Ben.
What happened to Reagan as he was aging? The Reagan from the 40s strangely sounds like someone penetrated with the Christian values of empathy and charity, and ready to see these put in practice at the political level. Has he became a Christian in church from a Christian in heart?…

There's a story that his father-in-law asked him: Do you want to be rich. Reagan said, Yes. He then said that he had to join the Republican Party. And, of course, Reagan did just that. (I mean, today's Republican Party, if they're even a political party, serve the super-rich. And that's it. And the Democrats are moving in that direction.
So, we do have democracy. It's democracy for the few -- :))

[Ben]

....which must make Eisenhower a raving communist.

He'd be on the far left -- by today's standards.

[danthepoetman]

I’m afraid that right turn world politics has taken dates back to 89-90, or to the pre-crumbling years of the “Eastern Block”. A fear has been lifted from the minds of some “money Powers”. There’s nothing left to hold them back and manipulate at will behind the scene. Is it a conspiracy? No need for that: money simply talk, and convergence of interests. If only people could see where their best interest rests! but money can buy tv stations and commentators (if it’s not simply, once again, convergence of interests), some type of propaganda can easily pass as information. Extreme liberalism (no holds bar) is not anything new, nor is it a promise of something better: it’s what we fought to get a better life through labour forces and progressive politics. Political parties have to be reinvested by people, especially ordinary people.

[bluesoul]

One of the comments from this post stated this.

"'Keep taking from those making it and soon there will be fewer of them to take from.' That's EXACTLY what is happening, the rich keep taking it from the working class, and now that there are fewer to take it from, they blame them. It's akin to the clouds refusing to rain and complaining that there is a drought and therefore a lack of evaporation. "

i don't get it. isn't this a terrible comparison? it rains because water has condensed then becomes heavy again and falls as liquid water. clouds have no choice in this matter.

it would be like saying someone has become so greedy with their piss that they refuse to go to the bathroom.

also, this idea of letting money cycle would make sense if people lived forever or if the status quo would remain constant- but that's never the case

[MdR Dave]

Willie was apostrophizing clouds, and aptly so.

What has happened is that the middle class- the "household", essentially, the workers, the real source of wealth- has been decimated. They no longer receive adequate fruits from their labors. Capital accrues almost entirely to the capitalist, and tax law, campaign reform, etc. are making that codified policy.

Know anybody who has gotten a decent raise in the last 4 years? Companies are doing great, markets have recovered, but not the mean American.

Even folks with cost of living increases are fucked- Bush removed fuel and food, two incredibly significant an inflationary expenses, from the official market basket used for adjustments. The "official" inflation rate calculation changed a decade ago, but we are still subject to the higher prices.

And just wait until the effects of quantitative easing start to affect our lives. It only gets worse from here.

[bluesoul]

Willie was apostrophizing clouds, and aptly so.

What has happened is that the middle class- the "household", essentially, the workers, the real source of wealth- has been decimated. They no longer receive adequate fruits from their labors. Capital accrues almost entirely to the capitalist, and tax law, campaign reform, etc. are making that codified policy.

Know anybody who has gotten a decent raise in the last 4 years? Companies are doing great, markets have recovered, but not the mean American.

Even folks with cost of living increases are fucked- Bush removed fuel and food, two incredibly significant an inflationary expenses, from the official market basket used for adjustments. The "official" inflation rate calculation changed a decade ago, but we are still subject to the higher prices.

And just wait until the effects of quantitative easing start to affect our lives. It only gets worse from here.

i still don't see how this can be compared to clouds and rain. every day humans are responsible for the extinction of 200 species and currently, the most popular tv shows on earth are fake singing competitions-

but you guys are worried that someone who makes no qualms about telling people he doesn't give a shit about them, says he doesn't give a shit about them

[MdR Dave]

but you guys are worried that someone who makes no qualms about telling people he doesn't give a shit about them, says he doesn't give a shit about them

I'd actually appreciate that about Romney if he didn't seem psychopathic instead of just honest.

I can't admire him for the thought behind the statements, though- and I won't help but feel disappointed when a lot of the 47% he thinks so little of vote for him.

As for the clouds, if the original post was a poem we could refer to an explicator- no such luck in this instance.

[MdR Dave]

He'd be on the far left -- by today's standards.

That's gospel, Ben. Eisenhower was a Republican from a different era, though.

And even St. Ronald would fail the current "Reagan Republican" test.

[Willie Escalade]

It was just one of the comments in the article that rang true with me. If one continues to take from another, eventually there'll be nothing else to take.