Posted on 11/15/2012 10:03:20 PM PST by TrueStarSpangled
A handful of prominent Republicans criticized Mitt Romney for his disparaging remarks about President Barack Obama’s “gifts” to core constituencies, saying that it was the wrong message to send voters as the party tries to rebuild itself after a bruising defeat. “I don’t think it’s helpful,” Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad told POLITICO at the Republican Governors Association conference on Thursday. “I guess my feeling is that we need to turn the page, and we need to focus on the future and not make excuses for the past.”
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
The logic amazes me. You criticize Romney in paragraph two with a classic leftwing class warfare argument, with hands off my entitlements to boot. Then in the conclusion you say Romney is too liberal, after using Obama’s Alinskyite critique.
You must have been born yesterday to think that if you can get the GOP to abandon retirees, the budget is going to get balanced. These idiots will take the money from Marcella (they want to purge the whitey elderly people via theft/poverty) and spend it on Obama’s mob who have paid nothing for it. That is called wealth transfer. There won’t be any “balanced budget” with this crowd. Ever.
What I have is not an entitlement - I paid for my social security and I pay for Medicare every month.
With his present comments, he proved his earlier comment about the 47% (whatever number that was) that got government benefits so would not vote for him. His comment today was Obama gave people gifts so they would vote for him. You see, when anyone gets something from the government even though we paid for it, Romney sees it as a “gift” from the government. That is the business man in him - eliminate all that and save money.
Romney's social acceptance of homosexuals, helping pass a homo marriage bill when he was governor, approving homosexuals in the boy scouts, approving abortion until he ran for president, for gun control, passing government healthcare, etc., etc. He is a liberal.
True
My comment was in response to one particular persons argument. The cut the other guys handout but leave mine alone one. As to the whole SS collecting population, good job by them, but I was not talking about them. As to what’s way too liberal, we might agree or disagree on that. I am personally strong for Liberty through Smaller Government. I am wary of nanny staters be they coming from the left or right, Statists all in my book.
The “Free Stuff” has to stop before the country will change. A tall order indeed.
Thanks, Sara. I am a bit OVER 65 - I am 80. I didn’t have to get on Medicare until I was 76 as my husband still had insurance from his company until I was 76 and I was on that. So, I SAVED the GOVERMENT MONEY! There is something about Social Security that is not fair. I paid into that all my life, but since my husband died, I can only draw one of those, either his or mine. So, the GOVERNMENT MADE MONEY as they kept my paid in Social Security money and I only have his.
At some time many people will have to face reality that not all persons seemingly in need are deserving of taking ‘benefits’ away from others. There seems to be a prevailing social attitude that any person deserves to some extent more or less to have what his neighbor has. It seems to me that this is the root of the welfare state or some other name.
Come, come, young lady. Is your mother at home right now, or isn't she? ;)
There is no argument about Romney being too liberal, he is.
You sound like a social liberal yourself, if so, as a liberal, you probably thought that the Massachusetts governor was pretty much OK for your politics.
By definition SS and Medicare are entitlements. That is what they are called.That is the category they are listed under in the budget. By the time we shuffle off this mortal coil, a vast majority will collect way more than they paid in. The paid in part runs out, I will be conservative, in five to six years. So after age 71, yes you will be receiving somebody else’s money, and so will I. Though in my case the whole system will probably have gone bankrupt, so maybe not for me. I say keep getting what your getting, but for us under 55, we got to set up something different for the simple reason we will run out of money. I accept this for myself. I am not going to receive the entitlements those older than me get. I’m fine with that, as long as we can get some fiscal sanity.
“By definition SS and Medicare are entitlements.”
I am aware of that but I reject that name as it has come to mean something “free” and it is not. In the beginning, it meant a person was entitled to something due to something that happened to give them ownership of something - they were entitled to it - a title is ownership of something. I owned my social security account that I paid into so I was entitled to it - it was not a gift.
Maybe you will be so wealthy, you won’t need yours when you are retirement age and you can give that money, your money you paid in, back to the government.
Considering the other alternative, Obama, he was the best choice I had. As to being a social liberal, we probably agree on most of those issues, however I place economic and national security ones higher on the list of priorities. I’m pro-life, based on simple logic and science. As to gay rights, what someone does in private is none of my business, but it becomes my business when they demand I alter my own private views. Like I said, we agree more than we disagree, but we have different priorities, not views.
“Come, come, young lady. Is your mother at home right now, or isn’t she? ;)”
I live alone with my Yorkie, Prissy. I am that old and have seen many US presidents come and go.
I am also a prepper and write prepper articles on a survival website. I stay very busy writing and reading and researching.
It would sure be great if we could get the wealthy and even the over $100,000 crowd to vote like the social security crowd, man, conservatism would rule.
You are somewhat liberal, and naturally, a liberal like Romney is a much better fit for you than for conservatives.
When I reach retirement age, which for other reasons is never, there will be no more money left. It will be long gone. I plan on working as long as physically possible. I had a neighbor growing up who lived his whole life toward his retirement. Denied himself for years to build that retirement nest egg. The day came he planned for, he got the party and the gold watch, but he dropped dead by the end of the week. All that sacrifice for nothing. Because of that I swore I would never retire.
I think a better fit for you would be New Deal Democrat. You seem to like all the class warfare, soak the rich arguments. The only difference between you and Nancy Pelosi is that you differ on what to spend other people’s money on. Or maybe you are right. You must be using the true meaning of the words. I am a classical liberal, one who believes in free markets and small government. And you are a classic conservative, one who believes in strong autocratic clerical government like the Holy Alliance in post-Napoleonic Europe.
The Austro-Hungarian Empire must be your ideal society.
By definition SS and Medicare are entitlements. That is what they are called.That is the category they are listed under in the budget.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
I don’t care what they are listed as.
Just because ‘they’ said that booze and drugs were not a behavioral problem, but an illness (that they now pay bennies from SS funds) doesn’t make it true.
Well, if SS and Medicare are entitlements - which means it is ‘given’ to us, that would mean that since 1953 the government has been STEALING money from me, right out of my pocket.
I didn’t ‘blow’ the money, it was never mine to do anything with.
Now whether or not this trend can be continued is another story but for people like you to sit there and try and convince others that paying into FICA and MEDICARE for a great portion of ones life is an entitlement is wrong.
FICA itself was/is called Federal Insurance CONTRIBUTION Act.
Romney, for all his faults, in this case is asserting the truth. It’s a shame it took him until there was nothing more to lose to use such candor. If we estimate the most effective path to future success is merely doing an impression of the other guys, what is the point?
That was one silly post, and it made no sense at all.
Care to quote me saying any of that? You can’t, it was just angry lying on your part, and rather strange, bizarre lying at that.
I can quote you embracing Nancy Pelosi’s and the left’s position on homosexuality though.
You can be quoted as liberal, I can be quoted as conservative, and wishing for the wealthy to vote more conservative, to vote as conservative as our social security collectors.
My appeal for more conservative voting, seems to have upset you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.