Mitt Romney defends ‘not concerned about the very poor’ remarks days ahead of Nevada primary

[Shortline Bus]

"Mitt Romney is in damage-control mode after remarking that he's "not concerned about the very poor."

 

The Republican presidential candidate insisted his Wednesday comments were taken out of context.

 

"No, no, no, no," he testily protested when asked about the statement on his campaign plane later in the day. "I've said throughout the campaign my focus, my concern, my energy is gonna be devoted to helping middle income people, all right?"

 

He added the poorest Americans have a "safety net" with programs like Medicaid, the Earned Income Tax Credit and food stamps.

 

"If there are holes in it, I will work to repair that. And if there are people that are falling through the cracks I want to fix that," Romney said. "Wealthy people are doing fine. But my focus in the campaign is on middle income people. Of course I'm concerned about all Americans: the poor, wealthy, middle class, but the focus of my effort will be on middle income families who I think have been most hurt by the Obama economy."

 

 

 

 

 

Mitt Romney defends

[Via Garibaldi 8]

lol.... He's absolutely right... The poor have welfare to fall back on and us working folks to milk...

[Shortline Bus]

lol.... He's absolutely right... The poor have welfare to fall back on and us working folks to milk...

 

 

VG8 it printed here not to be anti-romney but because it was the lead story this morning (2/2/12)on all the news shows. Even the endorsement of Donald Trump for "Mitt" got overshadowed here. Still the way he said it in that interview and debate does make him look 'cold-hearted.' reactions?

[Shortline Bus]

Guys you be the judge. This was from this week interview on CNN Solead O' Brien morning show.

 

 

[lilbluefoxie]

lol.... He's absolutely right... The poor have welfare to fall back on and us working folks to milk...

 

The message Romney was trying to get out was, the poor already have a safety net, the rich already have money, his focus was on strengthening the middle class who don't have tons of money nor a safety net.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The message Romney was trying to get out was, the poor already have a safety net, the rich already have money, his focus was on strengthening the middle class who don't have tons of money nor a safety net.

 

Aside from that, let's be realistic. We all know who keeps this country running and it certainly isn't the poor that take away from the wealth of this country. The middle class should be the focus of all campaigns because we get hit the hardest. Hell for that matter the single working class folks get hit the hardest. I was shocked to see my tax return this year, which was marginally better than the previous year in terms of what I'll get back, but still laughable, esp. from NYS.

[MHV9218]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[Via Garibaldi 8]

This is the essence of Mitt Romney right here. In fact, if he were being honest, he would have admitted he's not concerned about the poor either. Or the middle class. No, he's there for himself, to get himself more power and to help out his fellow one-percenters.

 

Yes, of course because all Republicans are evil.

[MHV9218]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[Via Garibaldi 8]

No, it's just that Mitt Romney happens to be a compulsive liar, corporatist pig, and soulless politician all rolled into one.

 

Okay fine. Name one Republican that you have some positive to say about...

[MHV9218]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[Nova RTS 9147]

This is probably the only time we'll see Romney with a consistent view on any issue.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Only one?

 

Alright, I'll take a recent one. Roy McDonald. New York guy. I don't see eye to eye with him on all the issues, but he's honest and he has a soul to stand up for what's right, now just vote for what'll do well with his party (see Romney). I can say I genuinely admire and respect the man.

 

Let's not be silly. It's not like I have a vendetta against Republicans. I just vehemently disagree with most of the party's rhetoric, which makes it a little hard to support the people.

 

Ha!! Sure you don't. [Coughs...] You lie!!

[Roadcruiser1]

The Republicans are nothing more then a bunch of rich people that does nothing, but sits on their butts all day. We already had a Republican before Obama and he was Bush. Bush was horrible. He didn't do anything but end up causing trouble. I mean I wouldn't hate the Republicans if they had the poor in their group, and they supported the poor as well along with the Middle Class, but they are all a group of rich pigs. How do you support that? Name one modern Republican that ever did something good and I will let it slide, but I can't find anything good. Obama killed Osama, Anwar, and multiple terrorists while Bush did nothing, he reduced unemployment as you can read in recent news, and he is doing better so far so I will give him credit. I can't find anything that Republicans have done that is good so far so NO they will not get my support.

[Shortline Bus]

The Republicans are nothing more then a bunch of rich people that does nothing, but sits on their butts all day. We already had a Republican before Obama and he was Bush. Bush was horrible. He didn't do anything but end up causing trouble. I mean I wouldn't hate the Republicans if they had the poor in their group, and they supported the poor as well along with the Middle Class, but they are all a group of rich pigs. How do you support that? Name one modern Republican that ever did something good and I will let it slide, but I can't find anything good. Obama killed Osama, Anwar, and multiple terrorists while Bush did nothing, he reduced unemployment as you can read in recent news, and he is doing better so far so I will give him credit. I can't find anything that Republicans have done that is good so far so NO they will not get my support.

 

Being fair to both of our '2' major parties (except for election time)very few of the politicans care about the poor. Keep in mind, in last 15 years or so, Democratics have also gotten help from very rich people as well for campaigns. As Concourse would say, it is a 2-party monoply as both sides care little about the poor and working class at the bottom.

[IntExp]

The basic thing is this- this was a dumb comment to make, especially when more people are seeking help from the 'safety net' which is already under strain- and we're in a bad economy. The safety net has holes in it, and we have to strengthen it to ensure that those who are entering into the safety net can be protected and covered adequately for it. The Census Bureau is reporting that

...in 2010, median household income declined, the poverty rate increased and the percentage without health insurance coverage was not statistically different from the previous year. Real median household income in the United States in 2010 was $49,445, a 2.3 percent decline from the 2009 median. The nation's official poverty rate in 2010 was 15.1 percent, up from 14.3 percent in 2009 ─ the third consecutive annual increase in the poverty rate. There were 46.2 million people in poverty in 2010, up from 43.6 million in 2009 ─ the fourth consecutive annual increase and the largest number in the 52 years for which poverty estimates have been published....

 

That are levels that we haven't seen since the 1990's, and what is even more worrying is that this the first time since the Great Depression that that median household income, adjusted for inflation, had not risen over such a long period. Plans the Ryan Plan, which do not help the American working class, the poor, and the middle class, by turning Medicaid & Medicare into worthless block grant and voucher programs respectively, ripping a giant hole into the safety net that so many Americans, young, old, children or adults, white or black, and so on, depend on. I understand that we have to fix Medicare & Medicaid, because they contribute much to the Federal Deficit- but that is not the way to do so, by leaving those who depend on the program helpless. Paul Krugman states it best when he says....

 

...the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has documented, between 90 percent and 99 percent of the dollars allocated to safety-net programs do, in fact, reach the beneficiaries....how could a candidate declare that safety-net programs do no good and declare only 10 days later that those programs take such good care of the poor that he feels no concern for their welfare? Now, the truth is that the safety net does need repair. It provides a lot of help to the poor, but not enough. Medicaid, for example, provides essential health care to millions of unlucky citizens, children especially, but many people still fall through the cracks: among Americans with annual incomes under $25,000, more than a quarter — 28.7 percent — don’t have any kind of health insurance. And, no, they can’t make up for that lack of coverage by going to emergency rooms....Mr. Romney’s tax plan would actually raise taxes on many lower-income Americans, while sharply cutting taxes at the top end. More than 80 percent of the tax cuts would go to people making more than $200,000 a year, almost half to those making more than $1 million a year, with the average member of the million-plus club getting a $145,000 tax break. And these big tax breaks would create a big budget hole, increasing the deficit by $180 billion a year — and making those draconian cuts in safety-net programs necessary.

 

Now, to MHV9218- listen- I'm a liberal too, both politically and socially, but I try to get along my more Conservative counterparts and their opinons. There's no need to bash one side of the aisle (even though their polices have a great deal of fault) and proclaim that one side is the only good side, the ones who can solve anything, the one's who actually care- no. Both Democrats and Republicans, no matter how they try to portray themselves, are doing the bidding of the rich- it's a theme that most members of the forum have expanded upon over and over again. Both patronize the rich, doing their favors, sucking up to them to get campaign donations, and neither party is innocent, they're both at fault. I'm gonna let Paul Krugman finish it off for me with a quote I consider the truth, and an instant classic as well, when he says....

At this rate, we may soon have politicians who admit what has been obvious all along: that they don’t care about the middle class either, that they aren’t concerned about the lives of ordinary Americans, and never were.

[Roadcruiser1]

The basic thing is this- this was a dumb comment to make, especially when more people are seeking help from the 'safety net' which is already under strain- and we're in a bad economy. The safety net has holes in it, and we have to strengthen it to ensure that those who are entering into the safety net can be protected and covered adequately for it. The Census Bureau is reporting that

 

 

That are levels that we haven't seen since the 1990's, and what is even more worrying is that this the first time since the Great Depression that that median household income, adjusted for inflation, had not risen over such a long period. Plans the Ryan Plan, which do not help the American working class, the poor, and the middle class, by turning Medicaid & Medicare into worthless block grant and voucher programs respectively, ripping a giant hole into the safety net that so many Americans, young, old, children or adults, white or black, and so on, depend on. I understand that we have to fix Medicare & Medicaid, because they contribute much to the Federal Deficit- but that is not the way to do so, by leaving those who depend on the program helpless. Paul Krugman states it best when he says....

 

 

 

Now, to MHV9218- listen- I'm a liberal too, both politically and socially, but I try to get along my more Conservative counterparts and their opinons. There's no need to bash one side of the aisle (even though their polices have a great deal of fault) and proclaim that one side is the only good side, the ones who can solve anything, the one's who actually care- no. Both Democrats and Republicans, no matter how they try to portray themselves, are doing the bidding of the rich- it's a theme that most members of the forum have expanded upon over and over again. Both patronize the rich, doing their favors, sucking up to them to get campaign donations, and neither party is innocent, they're both at fault. I'm gonna let Paul Krugman finish it off for me with a quote I consider the truth, and an instant classic as well, when he says....

 

I think it's time to create a new political party. I think we should call ourselves the Federalists after the founding father's party.

[Shortline Bus]

I await MHV reply myself.:eek:

 

 

The basic thing is this- this was a dumb comment to make, especially when more people are seeking help from the 'safety net' which is already under strain- and we're in a bad economy. The safety net has holes in it, and we have to strengthen it to ensure that those who are entering into the safety net can be protected and covered adequately for it. The Census Bureau is reporting that

 

 

That are levels that we haven't seen since the 1990's, and what is even more worrying is that this the first time since the Great Depression that that median household income, adjusted for inflation, had not risen over such a long period. Plans the Ryan Plan, which do not help the American working class, the poor, and the middle class, by turning Medicaid & Medicare into worthless block grant and voucher programs respectively, ripping a giant hole into the safety net that so many Americans, young, old, children or adults, white or black, and so on, depend on. I understand that we have to fix Medicare & Medicaid, because they contribute much to the Federal Deficit- but that is not the way to do so, by leaving those who depend on the program helpless. Paul Krugman states it best when he says....

 

 

 

Now, to MHV9218- listen- I'm a liberal too, both politically and socially, but I try to get along my more Conservative counterparts and their opinons. There's no need to bash one side of the aisle (even though their polices have a great deal of fault) and proclaim that one side is the only good side, the ones who can solve anything, the one's who actually care- no. Both Democrats and Republicans, no matter how they try to portray themselves, are doing the bidding of the rich- it's a theme that most members of the forum have expanded upon over and over again. Both patronize the rich, doing their favors, sucking up to them to get campaign donations, and neither party is innocent, they're both at fault. I'm gonna let Paul Krugman finish it off for me with a quote I consider the truth, and an instant classic as well, when he says....

[Grand Concourse]

excellent points INTexp.

I think it's time to create a new political party. I think we should call ourselves the Federalists after the founding father's party.

 

Sadly will never happen, as the closest to a true 3rd part (Green) is at best a spoiler and not really all that serious (Roseanne Barr??)

 

But yes, this whole GOP bad, Democrat good and vice versa BS has to end. It's quite clear some people here are biased for one group over the other over a letter. People just sees (in most cases in cities like NYC) an R, then it become automatically polarizing. But for god's sakes, are people that gullible? That's how the 2 party monopoly wins because of the fighting by the politicians and the voters that buys into this SCAM.

 

This whole statement can be repeated till infinity and people will still support their party like it's their "religion". It's no wonder the country is what it is today.

[MHV9218]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[Grand Concourse]

Obviously Romney will be for the corporate groups, but what about Obama? How the hell does this guy raise as much money as he does? I know he's popular with some people, but no way does the average joe afford the amount of money he's collected so far. I don't see Obama turning things around, if anything he's been fortunate with world events happening in his favor. In his administration, the TSA under Napalitano has become worse with frisking of children and old people. Has this country become that degenerate now where the innocent are targeted by those scum in uniform? All this in the name of political correctness? And People may say Egypt is better off as a 'democracy' setting off this 'arab spring', but all it's done was turn Egypt into a huge mess and driving away the tourists that were propping up its economy. Yeah, sure has been better now, thank you Hilary. So if these two women are staying on with Obama, then that's more a reason to vote against him.

 

Pull out of the mid east and let that area go to hell, and until otherwise the threat so far are from the middle east (more so than the average white child or senior citizens) especially when you have the nuts in Iran actively menacing us with the threats of sleeper cells.

 

And the liberal policies like doling out money to prop up banks, questionable green energy companies, car companies* etc with taxpayer money is any better? The fed is printing money like monopoly bills to cover a $15 trillion hole. Spending the country into oblivion is not the answer. Fiscal responsibility is what's needed now. If not for Europe being in the toilet and a temporary flocking to the dollar, things would be as bad as Greece now.

 

*GM recently posted a loss and those hybrid cars aren't selling very well; while Chrysler, which was sold off to Fiat, finally is getting back on its feet.

[MHV9218]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[Grand Concourse]

While I do agree tax cuts for the rich has to end, spending in government across the board (not just the military as liberals would scream) mainly social programs (no not cutting all funding, but they gotta be scaled back too). If there's no money in the 'vault', then there should be no reason to prop up expensive programs.

 

If we the average joe were to run up debt like the government does, we'd be out of a job, homeless, and SOL. The government should not be this irresponsible with our money. Why should I pay my fair share if the govt refuses to be more responsible and saddles my future generation with this debt?

 

Look at California, they can keep taxing to death the rich, but they'll still keep losing money, why? The rich are probably looking for loop holes or just leaving the state. There's only so much you can continue the tax and spend mantra till you have no one left. Spending needs to be cut. You can't run things by taxing and NOT cutting on spending.

 

Minimum wage, yes people have a right to earn more, but unless small businesses gets tax breaks/incentives they will have to close because they can't afford to keep the workers and then you have the mega stores like walmart moving in and destroying the local economy. So things are not so black and white about haulting tax cuts.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Look, my bashing is not exclusive to the Republicans -- I happen to generally consider the Democrats a group of weak, spineless, compromising, sold-out senior citizens. As bad as they are however, there's a larger problem here.

 

The view I've been hearing more and more frequently is that "the parties are both the same, it doesn't make a difference." I'm not saying that's your view, but that's been repeated by many on this site, and it's one of the most unpatriotic things any American can say. The gap between Conservative and Liberal ideology is absolutely massive, especially as the Conservatives get even wackier with the barely distilled racism that is the Tea Party. Looking at the two parties and not feeling distinctly closer to one of them just tells me that you're not thinking, as if you can't make up your mind on the most basic issues (choice vs. "life," tax the poor vs. tax the rich, free health care vs. paid health care, etc.) then there's something genuinely wrong. Going with that, you have to pick a side -- it's the gooey bipartisanship that has stopped Obama from doing the things he promised in office, and that's his own fault.

 

So to argue that the parties are both pandering to the rich, that we shouldn't be choose sides -- I'm sorry, I completely disagree with that. Yes, they are both pandering to the rich. Yes, the Democrats have no balls and the Republicans have no brains. But as mediocre as the options are, it's your duty as an American to look at what either party stands for and make up your mind on the issues. I disagree with Democratic policies a decent portion of the time, but I literally always disagree with Conservative policy. Bipartisanship doesn't help us all win, it just makes sure everybody loses.

 

I also don't see where you got from my post that I was proclaiming one side was "better." I pointed out that Mitt Romney saying he cares about the middle class is a lie, and because we can't take disagreement on this site, VG8 immediately ran out of rebuttal points and accused me of saying that 'cause he's a Republican. And I'm not saying that 'cause he's a Republican. I'm saying that because it's true. He is a lying corporatist scoundrel who stands for absolutely nothing. And, that, per this topic, is all that matters here.

 

I didn't run out of rebuttal points. What I said is the truth... You claim that you point out that the Democrats aren't so great, but in reality, it seems like you say that as a cover up. It's more like you strongly believe that the Democrats have the answers, and everybody else is "unpatriotic", which quite frankly irks me. NO PARTY has the answers in this country as shown by both the Republicans and the Democrats, hence why we need a third party as I and others have suggested before.

 

I wish you would stop calling others "unpatriotic" because that to use one of your famous terms is a spineless statement. :tdown: That's what makes America great... We're FREE to think differently. :tup:

 

Finally, you think spending money that we don't have is the answer?? We had Bush and the Republicans spending like drunken sailors and turning our surplus into a deficit and now we have Obama continuing with the irresponsible spending. A Democrat and a Republican both spending like no tomorrow. The only difference may be that the Obama administration has tried to throw a few more bones to the middle class. Big deal... I'm falling over my chair in excitement.

 

 

What's funny is how you've complained about Bush spending like crazy, but now that a Democrat is doing it's eh okay, even though we're in no position to do so. Now I await your usual I'm clueless, unpatriotic and so on.

[Tokkemon]

This is my favorite link in all the internet:

 

Gifts to the United States Government: Questions and Answers: Financial Management Service