Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Romney's Relentless Push for Independents Waters Down His Welfare Reform Argument ^

Posted on 08/08/2012 7:50:43 PM PDT by tsowellfan

RUSH: Okay, this gonna be one of those hard days. I have to tell you, I think that sound bite could have been so much better. Why is it important to say Bill Clinton and the Republicans who were in Congress at the time came together, bipartisan basis? It's this relentless push for independents which have abandoned Obama already, or at least they had. I don't know where they stand now. I think poll to poll they're still pretty much with Romney. And they did it on their own. You didn't have to promise independents bipartisanship or any of this other rotgut...

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: election2012; romney; rushlimbaugh
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last
To: ansel12

21 posted on 08/08/2012 10:24:16 PM PDT by Tennessee Nana (Why should I vote for Bishop Romney when he hates me because I am a Christian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bigbob
“Romney may need to bring a rock-ribbed conservative like Paul Ryan on the ticket to send a strong message about what kind of agenda he will have”

If Romney chooses Paul Ryan it will be to shut him down - get him away from the budget and his austere cuts.

22 posted on 08/08/2012 11:03:20 PM PDT by Marcella (PREPARE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RaisingCain
"Next, you win back your conservative audience by pretending to be outraged and taken by surprise by things that were either predictable or utterly irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. This way you can have your cake and eat it too."

This latest thing -- concern trolling masquerading as show prep -- yesterday, Monday, and the Monday before it (it's actually getting to be a regular Monday feature). He's so put off by this Fluke thing and having to grovel a bit (FreedomWorks has notably, predictably stepped up into some prime air time).

Just needs to stop mailing in every third show...

23 posted on 08/08/2012 11:06:19 PM PDT by StAnDeliver (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: tsowellfan

The real outrage is not Palin’s exclusion but McCain’s INclusion as an RNC speaker. He proved he is an out-and-out traitor with his defense of the Muslim Brotherhood and attack on fellow Republicans trying to merely investigate MB ties to officials.

24 posted on 08/09/2012 4:34:50 AM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: TheRhinelander; All
That said this welfare reform thing is a crock. Obama did not strip the work requirement. Reading is hard. And trust me my hate for Obama is quite real but this entire argument is b.s.

I do NOT trust have only been here for 3 months. You must earn our trust....especially when you DEFEND OBAMA. Not a good start.

25 posted on 08/09/2012 4:38:16 AM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Williams

Yes, exactly. So the line, “gutting the work requirement” is not true. It’s more complicated than that. I support the original law and the federal rules on the work requirement. I do not support Obama’s executive order. That said, the argument needs to be framed correctly. When we dumb things like this down we open ourselves up to “they’re lying about this” and they would be half correct.

26 posted on 08/09/2012 5:23:55 AM PDT by TheRhinelander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TheRhinelander

Appreciate your points, but they (Washington Post and Obama) are not even half correct. The Washington Post knows that Americans will be VERY upset to know the work requirement has been removed from welfare reform. So they have to come up with, well it’s left to the states.

This is federal welfare and the REQUIREMENT has been removed. States can now ignore it, and states want as much money flowing in to their people as they can get. So the states will allow people to get welfare without working. The work requirement by the federal government is gone.

In addition to paying off his supporters, Obama is doing this to remove more people from the work force, in an effort to reduce the official unemployment numbers.

Dick Morris explained the whole purpose of the welfare reform they negotiated was to create work requirements that the states could not get around. Welfare reform is now gone as is the work requirement.

As I further have heard it explained, this was illegal because the law was written in a way to prevent the executive from doing this. Obama is removing the requirement because he is allowed to adjust reports the states make to the federal government. Just because he can adjust their reporting requirements, he is using that to change not just what they report but the substance of what they are doing.

The Romney ad is completely accurate and further based on direct experience the existing work requirement already was being evaded.

27 posted on 08/09/2012 8:51:09 AM PDT by Williams (No Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson