PDA

View Full Version : Romney's "Secret Video" and the Dem Politics of "Squirrel!"



mikesilvia
09-19-2012, 05:40 AM
Democrats need to change their party mascot from the donkey to the squirrel. They divert the media's and the electorate's short attention spans with fleeting, fuzzy objects -- like the main canine character in the...

More... (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2012/09/19/romneys_secret_video_and_the_dem_politics_of_squir rel)

pghin08
09-19-2012, 09:09 AM
Man, Michelle Malkin is a joke. I really don't know what else to say. The video is a big deal. The fact that Romney spoke that callously and that inaccurately is a big deal. Only a small percent of those 47% are "freeloaders". Give me a break, Michelle.

Wickabee
09-19-2012, 11:58 AM
Man, Michelle Malkin is a joke.
Amen.
The job John Stewart did on the tape was particularly scathing, and could go a long way to showing conservatives exactly why it is a big deal.

Wickabee
09-19-2012, 04:07 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/19/jon-stewart-romney-47-percent-video_n_1896310.html

JustAlex
09-19-2012, 04:38 PM
Thank "god" for this video.

Mittens was finally exposed for the Mr. Burns persona that Jon Stewart comically mocked him for.

Seriously, it's over!

duwal
09-19-2012, 05:05 PM
it was incredibly damaging to Mitt Romney because it showed his true colors.

AUTaxMan
09-19-2012, 07:03 PM
Man, Michelle Malkin is a joke. I really don't know what else to say. The video is a big deal. The fact that Romney spoke that callously and that inaccurately is a big deal. Only a small percent of those 47% are "freeloaders". Give me a break, Michelle.

If he hadn't said 47%, would it matter to you?

Wickabee
09-19-2012, 07:14 PM
If he hadn't said 47%, would it matter to you?

Unless the number he put out was backed up by stats, yes. Even if it was, it's a stupid thing to say.

habsheaven
09-19-2012, 07:20 PM
Who cares what the percentage was. He characterized ALL of Obama's supports in a derogatory way and then went on to basically write them off.

Wickabee
09-19-2012, 07:22 PM
Who cares what the percentage was. He characterized ALL of Obama's supports in a derogatory way and then went on to basically write them off.

Not to mention how much easier things would be if he were Latino.

AUTaxMan
09-19-2012, 07:30 PM
Unless the number he put out was backed up by stats, yes. Even if it was, it's a stupid thing to say.

If he merely said that we have a growing class of freeloaders in this society who are going to vote obama no matter what, that would have been a factual statement. Why is it stupid to say? Because he should have known the media would make a big deal out of it and blow it way out of proportion?

AUTaxMan
09-19-2012, 07:32 PM
Who cares what the percentage was. He characterized ALL of Obama's supports in a derogatory way and then went on to basically write them off.

What percentage of people who supported Obama at the beginning of 2012 do you think have or might have possibly swung to Romney in this election? I bet it's pretty close to zero.

habsheaven
09-19-2012, 07:40 PM
What percentage of people who supported Obama at the beginning of 2012 do you think have or might have possibly swung to Romney in this election? I bet it's pretty close to zero.

Who cares??? You don't call them all victims and dependant on the government.

Wickabee
09-19-2012, 07:41 PM
If he merely said that we have a growing class of freeloaders in this society who are going to vote obama no matter what, that would have been a factual statement. Why is it stupid to say? Because he should have known the media would make a big deal out of it and blow it way out of proportion?

Whether you want to admit it or not, he called 47% of your country freeloaders. This stat includes American soldiers, who are exempt from income tax. There is no way to defend it, I'm sorry.

AUTaxMan
09-20-2012, 10:35 AM
Who cares??? You don't call them all victims and dependant on the government.

Why does it matter if he offends them if he isn't going to get their vote anyway?

shrewsbury
09-20-2012, 10:55 AM
rich people can be called cheaters, and religious people fanatics, banks and wall street can be accused of ripping everyone off, any black person who doesn't like obama can be called an uncle tom, whites can be stereo typed as racist, but don't call people on welfare freeloaders!!!!

i would bet that the stats on who is taking advantage of welfare to those that aren't are staggering.

romney may not be better than obama but when you are comparing crap to diarrhea, is there really one that is better?
do you go with someone who has proven that they suck as president or do you go with someone who more than likely will suck as president?

habsheaven
09-20-2012, 11:01 AM
Why does it matter if he offends them if he isn't going to get their vote anyway?

It matters because it gives the impression that he doesn't care for anyone other than those who vote for him. Which is exactly what the Dems have been accusing him of. It is also a very endearing quality to have as a President. :frusty:

habsheaven
09-20-2012, 11:04 AM
rich people can be called cheaters, and religious people fanatics, banks and wall street can be accused of ripping everyone off, any black person who doesn't like obama can be called an uncle tom, whites can be stereo typed as racist, but don't call people on welfare freeloaders!!!!

i would bet that the stats on who is taking advantage of welfare to those that aren't are staggering.

romney may not be better than obama but when you are comparing crap to diarrhea, is there really one that is better?
do you go with someone who has proven that they suck as president or do you go with someone who more than likely will suck as president?

This is why Obama will win. Only people on the right (who won't vote for Obama anyway) think he has sucked. Independants think that he hasn't done as well as they had hoped. That will prove to be the key when it comes time to choose.

AUTaxMan
09-20-2012, 11:12 AM
It matters because it gives the impression that he doesn't care for anyone other than those who vote for him. Which is exactly what the Dems have been accusing him of. It is also a very endearing quality to have as a President. :frusty:

What effect does that have on him, though? If he doesn't make comments like that, the people who aren't going to vote for him STILL aren't going to vote for him.

Wickabee
09-20-2012, 11:49 AM
rich people can be called cheaters, and religious people fanatics, banks and wall street can be accused of ripping everyone off, any black person who doesn't like obama can be called an uncle tom, whites can be stereo typed as racist, but don't call people on welfare freeloaders!!!!


Not just welfare...social security, military pay, actual jobs that pay less a year than it would cost them to hear Romney insult them in person and so on. Why do you think this was only about welfare? It wasn't. He insulted a LOT of peopleand, in the end, you have a bunch of rich, white males saying and agreeing that 47% of the country is right off and "will never be convinced to take responsibility for their own lives...but support you troops, right?

AUTaxMan
09-20-2012, 11:56 AM
Not just welfare...social security, military pay, actual jobs that pay less a year than it would cost them to hear Romney insult them in person and so on. Why do you think this was only about welfare? It wasn't. He insulted a LOT of peopleand, in the end, you have a bunch of rich, white males saying and agreeing that 47% of the country is right off and "will never be convinced to take responsibility for their own lives...but support you troops, right?

It was not worded well, but he was CLEARLY not talking about those you have just mentioned.

Wickabee
09-20-2012, 11:57 AM
It was not worded well, but he was CLEARLY not talking about those you have just mentioned.
Well, if I said that you'd be asking for proof, but I suppose I'm just supposed to take your word for it.

Who does make up that 47%, AUT?

(and I would like an actual answer on this)

duwal
09-20-2012, 12:33 PM
This is why Obama will win. Only people on the right (who won't vote for Obama anyway) think he has sucked. Independants think that he hasn't done as well as they had hoped. That will prove to be the key when it comes time to choose.


not entirely true, I for one have thought that Obama has done a very good job in his time in office and he now will be getting my vote this time around. I know many other Republicans that have felt the same way where they are more than pleased now compared to the shape of the U.S. four years ago with what mess he had to take over

duane1969
09-20-2012, 12:34 PM
rich people can be called cheaters, and religious people fanatics, banks and wall street can be accused of ripping everyone off, any black person who doesn't like obama can be called an uncle tom, whites can be stereo typed as racist, but don't call people on welfare freeloaders!!!!

i would bet that the stats on who is taking advantage of welfare to those that aren't are staggering.

romney may not be better than obama but when you are comparing crap to diarrhea, is there really one that is better?
do you go with someone who has proven that they suck as president or do you go with someone who more than likely will suck as president?

Well said


It matters because it gives the impression that he doesn't care for anyone other than those who vote for him. Which is exactly what the Dems have been accusing him of. It is also a very endearing quality to have as a President. :frusty:

Obama has ignored West Virginia. He didn't come here during the 2007-08 primary. He didn't come here during the 2008 general election. In 4 years as president his only appearance was for an hour or so to give a 10 minute eulogy for the miners that were killed in a mining accident. West Virginia has the 5th highest poverty rate in America and is the 2nd poorest state. Defacto presumption (similar to what libs like to do) Obama doesn't care about the poor.

Difference between Obama and Romney...Romney essentially said it, Obama will lie to his dying day denying it.


This is why Obama will win. Only people on the right (who won't vote for Obama anyway) think he has sucked. Independants think that he hasn't done as well as they had hoped. That will prove to be the key when it comes time to choose.

So you admit that people on the left either are ignorant of the fact that Obama has accomplished nothing or they know it and just don't care?


Not just welfare...social security, military pay, actual jobs that pay less a year than it would cost them to hear Romney insult them in person and so on. Why do you think this was only about welfare? It wasn't. He insulted a LOT of peopleand, in the end, you have a bunch of rich, white males saying and agreeing that 47% of the country is right off and "will never be convinced to take responsibility for their own lives...but support you troops, right?

Troops, troops, troops. You keep banging that drum when Romney clearly wasn't talking about the troops. Romney said that the 47% he was talking about would automatically vote for Obama. Obviously all troops won't automatically vote for him, so clearly that wasn't who he was talking about. Give it a rest.

Wickabee
09-20-2012, 12:42 PM
Troops, troops, troops. You keep banging that drum when Romney clearly wasn't talking about the troops. Romney said that the 47% he was talking about would automatically vote for Obama. Obviously all troops won't automatically vote for him, so clearly that wasn't who he was talking about. Give it a rest.

You really think that? Let's take a look:

"There are 47% of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47% 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 they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it...These are people who pay no income tax, 47% of Americans pay no income tax. So our message of low taxes doesn't connect. So he'll (President Obama) be out there talking about tax cuts for the rich. I mean, that's what they sell every four years. And so my job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives. What I have to do is convince the five to ten percent in the center that are independents, that are thoughtful, that look at voting one or the other depending upon in some cases emotion, whether they like the guy or not."
He said 47% of Americans will automatically vote Obama.
He said THAT SAME 47% are entitled and will never be convinced to take responsibility and care for their own lives.
He said THAT SAME 47% is the 47% of the nation who does not pay income taxes.
WE KNOW that 47% of Americans who don't pay income tax includes veterans and military personnel.

So, if that entire 47% will never be convinced to take responsibility and care for their own lives. As such, he included the military, veterans, senior citizens, the working poor, the working class and students. These are all people who Romney said will never take responsibility for their own lives. You can make up stories about "what he actually meant" but he said what he said, and if you don't see why it's killing him right now, you're just as out of touch as he is.

So yeah, the troops. All those guys you pray for and put little bows on your cars for will never be convinced to take responsibility and care for their own lives. He may actually be right about military personnel. They're too busy caring for everyone else to care about themselves.

habsheaven
09-20-2012, 12:45 PM
So you admit that people on the left either are ignorant of the fact that Obama has accomplished nothing or they know it and just don't care?

You had better work on your reading comprehension. I never said anything like that. I never even mentioned people on the left? FWIW, people on the left are probably thnking much like the independants; they wanted more improvement in the economy than they got. That by no means, means that he hasn't accomplished anything.

Try sticking to what I write and not what you think when you quote me next time. It works a lot better and you don't end up looking like ...

mrveggieman
09-20-2012, 01:23 PM
not entirely true, I for one have thought that Obama has done a very good job in his time in office and he now will be getting my vote this time around. I know many other Republicans that have felt the same way where they are more than pleased now compared to the shape of the U.S. four years ago with what mess he had to take over


CHURCH!! :love0030::love0030::love0030:

AUTaxMan
09-20-2012, 01:29 PM
Well, if I said that you'd be asking for proof, but I suppose I'm just supposed to take your word for it.

Who does make up that 47%, AUT?

(and I would like an actual answer on this)

I'm not arguing with you that those you mentioned are not in the 47% number that Romney misused in his comments. The 47% was an incorrect over-generalization of the group that he was describing. Clearly, nobody believes that our troops or retirees are freeloaders.

Wickabee
09-20-2012, 01:36 PM
I'm not arguing with you that those you mentioned are not in the 47% number that Romney misused in his comments. The 47% was an incorrect over-generalization of the group that he was describing.
So we have to be mind readers when Romney talks now?
You think it's out of line to go by what he actually said? You think it's just fine to say, "He said one thing but meant something else entirely"? If it was Obama, would you be saying ět was a poorly worded over-generalization, but you have to look at the point he`s making, not the exact number he used or words he said?


Clearly, nobody believes that our troops or retirees are freeloaders.
Clearly, Mitt's words say the opposite. He thinks they are. He thinks they will never be convinced to take responsibility for their own lives. He thinks the same thing of students and the working poor. I'm not making this up, he said it.

To tell us we're focusing too much on the words he actually said instead of what he, in retrospect, probably should have meant is ridiculous.

ROMNEY JAZZ! It's the words you DON'T hear!

shrewsbury
09-20-2012, 01:54 PM
well latest poll show obama 47% (kind of strange) and romney 45%

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

with 147 million people at low income levels and only 314 million in america, that makes 47%(there's that number again) of people low income.

as for entitlements, we are at 100 million or about 32% of the population.
http://www.gopusa.com/freshink/2012/08/10/welfare/

JustAlex
09-20-2012, 01:58 PM
http://www.gopusa.com/freshink/files/2012/08/welfare_chart.jpg

Check out how MANIPULATIVE this chart really is.

The first bar is very small compared to the final one.....you would think that the number of people receiving entitlements has doubled or TRIPLED!

Actualy, it's only gone up 11 million or less than 10%......the GOP is KING of deception and manipulation!

Wickabee
09-20-2012, 02:00 PM
Oh, so everyone at low income levels will never take responsibility for their own lives. Okay...

AUTaxMan
09-20-2012, 03:10 PM
http://www.gopusa.com/freshink/files/2012/08/welfare_chart.jpg

Check out how MANIPULATIVE this chart really is.

The first bar is very small compared to the final one.....you would think that the number of people receiving entitlements has doubled or TRIPLED!

Actualy, it's only gone up 11 million or less than 10%......the GOP is KING of deception and manipulation!

It's not manipulative. Anyone with a brain can interpret those numbers correctly.

Wickabee
09-20-2012, 04:00 PM
It's not manipulative. Anyone with a brain can interpret those numbers correctly.

You don't see how the visual makes it look worse than it actually is?

AUTaxMan
09-20-2012, 04:03 PM
You don't see how the visual makes it look worse than it actually is?

If you are dumb enough to be deceived by that chart, you deserve to be deceived by it.

Wickabee
09-20-2012, 04:07 PM
If you are dumb enough to be deceived by that chart, you deserve to be deceived by it.

Oh, so what you're saying is this chart is MEANT to win the idiot vote?

If you don't see how that can very innocently fool people into thinking something that isn't true is, then you're beyond help. Many, many people are visual thinkers and, while they understand the numbers, it doesn't matter because the chart looks bad. You're not only deceiving people, but you're calling them idiots when the eventually vote for you.

duwal
09-20-2012, 04:23 PM
I'm not arguing with you that those you mentioned are not in the 47% number that Romney misused in his comments. The 47% was an incorrect over-generalization of the group that he was describing. Clearly, nobody believes that our troops or retirees are freeloaders.



Really??? You can't serious believe that not even a small percentage of the military personnel is using welfare or unemployment assistance. Absolutely a good portion of the percentage that Mitt stated included soldiers, a lot of them who struggle financially especially while they are away from their families and when they come back and either can't find a job or struggle with being back to a regular home life. Soldiers collectively are mostly made up of lower and middle class income families. And as we have seen in story after story there have been soldiers that have been like others in knowing how to work the system to their benefit

JustAlex
09-20-2012, 05:37 PM
If you are dumb enough to be deceived by that chart, you deserve to be deceived by it.
let me show you another graph:

http://www.addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/bush-tax-cuts-graph.jpg

You can clearly see that this VISUAL is meant to manipulate people into thinking that the tax rate would SHOOT UP into the sky.

The reality is much more sublime.

Wickabee
09-20-2012, 05:39 PM
I would think he blindly follows the Republican party and will never, ever admit wrongdoing by any of them, including Romney Campaign Headquarters AKA FOXNews.

No, he will just say that anyone who falls for it is stupid and not mention how many votes this tactic gets them.

But that's only if he doesn't see the deception.

habsheaven
09-20-2012, 05:43 PM
If you are dumb enough to be deceived by that chart, you deserve to be deceived by it.

That's the GOP mantra when trying to shore up their base. lol

AUTaxMan
09-20-2012, 09:46 PM
Really??? You can't serious believe that not even a small percentage of the military personnel is using welfare or unemployment assistance. Absolutely a good portion of the percentage that Mitt stated included soldiers, a lot of them who struggle financially especially while they are away from their families and when they come back and either can't find a job or struggle with being back to a regular home life. Soldiers collectively are mostly made up of lower and middle class income families. And as we have seen in story after story there have been soldiers that have been like others in knowing how to work the system to their benefit

I'm not sure how you drew any of those conclusions based on what I wrote.

AUTaxMan
09-20-2012, 09:49 PM
Oh, so what you're saying is this chart is MEANT to win the idiot vote?

If you don't see how that can very innocently fool people into thinking something that isn't true is, then you're beyond help. Many, many people are visual thinkers and, while they understand the numbers, it doesn't matter because the chart looks bad. You're not only deceiving people, but you're calling them idiots when the eventually vote for you.

No. I'm saying that the chart, while it may be visually deceptive to those who don't actually read it, is not itself difficult to read or interpret, and that if you aren't smart enough to read a simple chart and decipher what it says, or you don't care enough to pay attention to what it actually says, then I have no sympathy for you when you misinterpret it.

AUTaxMan
09-20-2012, 09:50 PM
let me show you another graph:

http://www.addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/bush-tax-cuts-graph.jpg

You can clearly see that this VISUAL is meant to manipulate people into thinking that the tax rate would SHOOT UP into the sky.

The reality is much more sublime.

Your point is well-taken. I just don't think it's that big of a deal.

Wickabee
09-20-2012, 11:00 PM
No. I'm saying that the chart, while it may be visually deceptive to those who don't actually read it, is not itself difficult to read or interpret, and that if you aren't smart enough to read a simple chart and decipher what it says, or you don't care enough to pay attention to what it actually says, then I have no sympathy for you when you misinterpret it.

Will you agree it's done on purpose?

Wickabee
09-20-2012, 11:02 PM
Your point is well-taken. I just don't think it's that big of a deal.

You don't think it's a big deal that FOX is deliberately deceiving voters? That couldn't be because it was done by your team, right?