Romney Talks Bluntly of Those Dependent on Government
Mitt Romney described almost half of Americans as “dependent upon government” during a private reception with donors this year and said those voters were likely to support President Obama because they believe they are “entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it.”
The blunt political and cultural assessment by the Republican presidential candidate offers a rare glimpse into Mr. Romney’s personal views as the campaign enters its final 50 days. Liberals quickly condemned the remarks as insensitive, and Mr. Obama’s campaign accused him of having “disdainfully written off half the nation.”
The recordings surfaced even as Mr. Romney sought to retool his campaign message amid internal campaign sniping and calls from Republicans outside the campaign for him to be more specific about how his policies will fix the nation’s economy. The video clips raised the possibility that his campaign...
Jim Lincoln wrote: Why John Y.! what I remembered you were living in Chicago! Too bad, if you moved and you still didn't Come out of the Catholic Church. Too many Protestant ministers are also this way, they forget they are suppose to be Christian first and secular people second, especially when they're in the pulpit. However since Roman Catholics, Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses are men-created religions, they are much interested in secular affairs than they are Christian. Ah, we can have saying anything counter to the Romish Church perhaps whoever you are working for will kick you out and you'll loose your access to very large Romish medical system?
I have never resided in Chicago, Illinois or the State of Illinois for that matter. I reside in another Middle West state, the name of which I will not divulge on here as I wish to remain anonymous on here and all other discussion forums. That is why I use an alias on discussion forums. The only access I have to a Catholic medical system is the Catholic hospital in the capitol city of the state where I reside if I need to go.
John Yurich USA wrote: What do I care about the Catholic priests in Chicago, Illinois for? I don't reside in the State of Illinois....
Why John Y.! what I remembered you were living in Chicago! Too bad, if you moved and you still didn't Come out of the Catholic Church.
Too many Protestant ministers are also this way, they forget they are suppose to be Christian first and secular people second, especially when they're in the pulpit. However since Roman Catholics, Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses are men-created religions, they are much interested in secular affairs than they are Christian.
Ah, we can have saying anything counter to the Romish Church perhaps whoever you are working for will kick you out and you'll loose your access to very large Romish medical system?
For the most part I agree with what Romney says in that clip. He is basically saying that there are 47% of Americans that will vote with Obama no matter what he says or does. Many of those people want Obama to remain in office because he, and most other democrats, do support giving more government handouts through welfare and other programs. There is no reason for Romney to even try to change the minds of these people. He instead wants to focus on the 10% of true independents in the center. If he can sway them he may end up with enough votes to defeat Obama. There is nothing wrong with that strategy. If you support freedom then you should be in favor of that strategy. If you want socialism and wealth redistribution, then you should support Obama.
I won't tell a lie, if I were on the receiving end of the hand outs, maybe I would want to keep "the one" in office too. I think it's odd that so many people in the media focus on this and Clint Eastwood's "empty chair" speech while Obama's foreign policy of acquiescence has made us worse off than we've been in decades.
It is apparent to all that understand how our monetary system operates that we are all (100%, not 50%) dependent upon government deficit spending or another consumer's deficit spending for us to be free of debt on the individual level.
Jim Lincoln wrote: John Y., I find your comments interesting also, but for different reasons. Were they inspired by your priest? I heard that politically conservative Romish priests are a rarity in Chicago.
What do I care about the Catholic priests in Chicago, Illinois for? I don't reside in the State of Illinois. I am not going to state what state I reside in as I wish to remain anonymous on here and every other discussion forum that I am on because I do not wish anybody to know where I reside. That is why I use an alias on here and every other discussion forum that I am on. As I stated on the article about Cameron of the United Kingdom my priest is not a supporter of liberation theology. My priest is a Republican.
But thankfully, I don't have to jpw. This country is never going back to being an agricultural economy, at least one Democratic economist has a balanced view on the subject, Previewing Democrats Economic Platform: Supporting Small Business, Education. Just as I don't believe Ulysses S. Grant was personally corrupt, Mr. Romney could be as equally "lily white," in his political motives, it will just go to lining the pockets of his friends and political allies, it was just further The Record of Republican Corruption. This record is way, way too long as it is.
what about that 16 trillion dollar donation to welfare recipients?
some perspective here.
what of the reps and dems that voted the jobs away with NAFTA?
give the land back to the people so that they can work. take down the statutes that take their money, time and religious freedom down and the nation will again reward those who work hard and have ingenuity.
Frank, I've seen that before, thanks for putting it up. There of course only one chosen nation, and that is Israel Irrevocable Blessings of the Jews.
John Y., I find your comments interesting also, but for different reasons. Were they inspired by your priest? I heard that politically conservative Romish priests are a rarity in Chicago. But unfortunately with a man-centered authoritative church such as your Romish one, it can go from one extreme to the other in politics, Such as "Liberation Theology," You can find a short description of it on the commentary about Tony Campolo who also goes from one political extreme to another, a supposed Protestant. An interesting examination of him.
Romney talked stupidly about these people many who are on Workers Compensation due to the plutocracy he is a member of, actually he talked intelligently about the Palestinians, q.v., Islam’s Universal Economic Failure.
Admittedly a secular comment, but interesting none-the-less.
When the thirteen colonies were still a part of England, Professor Alexander Tyler wrote about the fall of the Athenian republic over two thousand years previous to that time:
"A democracy [or republic] cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship.
"The average age of the world's great civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence:
from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage."
If Obama is re elected then the dependence upon the government for assistance will rise above the 50% level and when that happens then the United States is doomed and will become a totally socialist nation. The only way to stop that is for Romney to be elected. But some of you Evangelical Protestants on here don't seem to comprehend that voting for an Independent presidential candidate is useless since an Independent presidential candidate does not stand a chance of winning. Only Romney has a chance of winning over Obama.
1
There are a total of 10 user comments displayed | add new comment |
Dr. Joel Beeke | 11/11/2012
COMMENTS | 
in his political motives, it will just go to lining the pockets of his friends and political allies, it was just further 
You can find a short description of it on the commentary about 
therighthandoffellowship: "
stever
agree with what you sense lisa, its here
..."
