And people will STILL vote for this man.....

[LaylaMonroe]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/secret-video-romney-private-fundraiser

[blyempowered]

SMH! I'll say more when I get home.

[Furious Styles]

Yeah they do.. The southern baptist bet not say nothing else after questioning Obama's christian faith but yet they've thrown their hat behind a Mormon candidate....I have no problem with him being a mormon.. My issue is the hypocrisy behind it once you delve into the entire history of the Mormon Faith...

[blyempowered]

Yeah they do.. The southern baptist bet not say nothing else after questioning Obama's christian faith but yet they've thrown their hat behind a Mormon candidate....I have no problem with him being a mormon.. My issue is the hypocrisy behind it once you delve into the entire history of the Mormon Faith...

I need to refresh myself on the history of the Mormon faith. Here's what I want to say:

I find it so interesting that so many people, especially on twitter, are saying that Christians should vote based on biblical standards (I've kind of discussed this but feel it's relevant to bring up again). Therefore whatever candidate is against abortion and is for "traditional" marriage is the one we should vote on. My problem with that is two fold: 1) This country is not ran on biblical principles and 2) The same God that is concerned about babies and marriage is also concerned about how our finances are being run (ran) as well. I understand the traditional GOP argument of personal responsibility vs government help but to say that the ones for government intervention you're not worried about is ridiculous.

This is why I'm so sick of politics. It's like people are not willing to at least hear the other side of the argument....SMH!

[LaylaMonroe]

[LaylaMonroe]

Sad news for those of you who thought you were in the middle class.... you're not. You're actually poor. Well, unless you earn at least $200,000 a year.

BOSTON (AP) — Mitt Romney is promising to reduce taxes on middle-income Americans.
But how does he define "middle-income"? The Republican presidential nominee defined it as income of $200,000 to $250,000 a year.
Romney commented during an interview broadcast Friday on ABC's "Good Morning America."
The Census Bureau reported this week that the median household income — the midpoint for the nation — is just over $50,000.
The definition of "middle income" or the "middle class" is politically charged. Both presidential candidates are fighting to win over working-class voters.
President Barack Obama has defined "middle class" as income up to $250,000 a year.
Obama wants to extend Bush-era tax cuts for those making less than $250,000. Romney wants to extend the tax cuts for everyone.

http://news.yahoo.com/romney-says-middle-income-250k-below-134759085--election.html

[funkStrat_97]

http://news.yahoo.com/romney-says-middle-income-250k-below-134759085--election.html

Comprehensive tax reform and reduced government waste needs to happen sooner than later.....but I digress; people have been talking about these concepts for decades  .

[blyempowered]

Comprehensive tax reform and reduced government waste needs to happen sooner than later.....but I digress; people have been talking about these concepts for decades  .

Absolutely but both sides want to keep spending going as long as it's funding their personal agendas....SMH!

We need a 3rd party revolution alive again in this country....SMH!

[SirTJ]

*Standing by for U13's opinion*

I'm no Romney supporter, but I suspect a bit of "framing" here. In other words, politics as usual.

[under13]

lol. ^^

 I don't really have too much of an opinion when it comes to this election...

The only thing I will say is that many of his supporters share his views mentioned in the article, and that's why they will vote for him. And Ironically, a lot of his supporters are the ones who need and are using the entitlement programs he is against.

I also think this was a planned thing, and wasnt just something that happened to get leaked.

[LaylaMonroe]

TJ what kind of framing? Those are his words spoken very candidly at a private Republican-audience event. I don't think it "happened to" get leaked. I think that someone who wanted the inside scoop bought a ticket to gain entry and recorded it and intentionally shared it with the media to get the word out that this is what he REALLY thinks. He wouldn't say it in an interview or during a debate, but when he thinks no one is looking, this is how he really feels.

Obama supporters are broke down, welfare bums who think they're entitled to receive a handout.They don't pay taxes and they don't work jobs. They don't contribute to this country. Not to mention all the hidden implications in his statement.

[SirTJ]

"My job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."  <-- the way this is framed makes it seem like he's saying he doesn't care or won't worry about 47% of the country. He's not. He's talking about the election and focusing his efforts on those whose votes are still moveable.

As for the content, it's nothing new. There are many who adhere to that philosophy. I can't name too many books on success that don't, in essence, preach that same message. Whether it's right or not will always be up for debate.

[phbrown]

if he spins it right he will get even more people ... if he some how says it is about the users and abusers of the system 

[sjonathan02]

"My job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."  <-- the way this is framed makes it seem like he's saying he doesn't care or won't worry about 47% of the country. He's not. He's talking about the election and focusing his efforts on those whose votes are still moveable.

As for the content, it's nothing new. There are many who adhere to that philosophy. I can't name too many books on success that don't, in essence, preach that same message. Whether it's right or not will always be up for debate.

If this is a direct quote, then there's no framing at all, it's how he feels, and not just about the election, either. He's alluded to as much if you read between the lines when he speaks in public.

Are you telling me you think Romney actually cares about the working class? (sorry 'Rue, I don't want to say 'poor'...just yet, anyway )

[LaylaMonroe]

"My job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."  <-- the way this is framed makes it seem like he's saying he doesn't care or won't worry about 47% of the country. He's not. He's talking about the election and focusing his efforts on those whose votes are still moveable.

As for the content, it's nothing new. There are many who adhere to that philosophy. I can't name too many books on success that don't, in essence, preach that same message. Whether it's right or not will always be up for debate.

Ok so you're talking about the pic/quote, not the actual article and video then, right? If so, I can see what you're saying. But in the video, where you can hear it in context, that's not the message you get. Not at all. He goes on to explain that it's not his job to convince those people to vote for him because those people are not going to budge. He makes that clear in the video, but I guess the photo couldn't go that far. The photo only makes sense in proper context if you've seen the video.

[LaylaMonroe]

If this is a direct quote, then there's no framing at all, it's how he feels, and not just about the election, either. He's alluded to as much if you read between the lines when he speaks in public.

Are you telling me you think Romney actually cares about the working class? (sorry 'Rue, I don't want to say 'poor'...just yet, anyway )

Sorry Jonathan, unless you earn $200,000, you are POOR!!!! LOL! smh. Ole nutjob Mitt... smh.

[sjonathan02]

Sorry Jonathan, unless you earn $200,000, you are POOR!!!! LOL! smh. Ole nutjob Mitt... smh.

Well, then...uh...

[LaylaMonroe]

*just looked at the photo again*

I think there's enough of the quote in the photo to lend to the proper context of the quote... so I think his intent is clearly understood.

[gtrdave]

So is there some argument over the fact that Mitt recognizes that there is a certain percentage of the population that will not vote for him simply because he has an R next to his name instead of a D?
If so, seems like arguing over the obvious.

None of what he said should be ANY surprise to anyone who's been paying attention, imho.

I just wish any candidate would come out and tell the truth in the first place. Just lay all the cards on the table and then not have to back-track and follow up with 'clarifying statements'.
Of course, doing so wouldn't be very political, now would it? They all have to lie to some degree.
Our choice every election cycle is really which liar do we prefer.
At least that's how I've come to see it.

[LaylaMonroe]

So is there some argument over the fact that Mitt recognizes that there is a certain percentage of the population that will not vote for him simply because he has an R next to his name instead of a D?
If so, seems like arguing over the obvious.

Wow, Dave. That's what you got out of that?? Really????

Okay then. *shrug*

Wow.