Does Romney think that America is full of rich people?

[retromike22]

One thing I cannot stand about Romney, is when asked by a working class American about how they are struggling in life, his response is always in the frame of "I'm not going to do anything for you."

Like this:

http://thinkprogress.org/education/2012/03/05/437833/romney-to-college-student-if-you-want-affordable-college-shop-around-or-join-the-military/

"ROMNEY: The legislature in my state came together and said, ‘You know what, anyone that’s willing to serve in the National Guard, we’ll provide for tuition and fees for four years of college to make sure you get that start.’ So if you’re willing to serve, then we can be of more help. But my best advice is find a great institution of higher learning, find one that has the right price, and shop around. In America, this idea of competition, it works! [...] I want to make sure that every kid in this country that wants to go to college gets the chance to go to college. If you can’t afford it, scholarships are available, shop around for loans, make sure you go to a place that’s reasonably priced, and if you can, think about serving the country ’cause that’s a way to get all that education for free."

Well.... that's how it is now. He's only mentioning extreme or undesirable options for students that already exist. I can understand that because he's a conservative he does want the government to take an active role, but he could at least come up with a conservative private market solution that will change the current situation, because its not an ideal situation.

I can't think of one... I bet Gingrich could think of one lol.

Either way, Romney needs to remember that there are a lot of working class voters, including former Santorum voters, who don't like to be told "You're on your own."

[AmericanNation]

I'm sick of the left's "You're on your own" obsession, but I'll bite. 
"You're on your own" is a MUCH MUCH MUCH better thing to hear than: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you." 

[AmericanNation]

Also, "You're on your own" general means "Freedom and Free Markets are better than serfdom and Central Planning, so I won't impose the latter on you." 

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

I'm sick of the left's "You're on your own" obsession, but I'll bite. 
"You're on your own" is a MUCH MUCH MUCH better thing to hear than: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you." 

That depends entirely on one's particular situation, as I once dared to hope was obvious.

Also, "You're on your own" general means "Freedom and Free Markets are better than serfdom and Central Planning, so I won't impose the latter on you." 

Which is, of course, a false dichotomy and the people saying it know it, even if you don't.

[You kip if you want to...]

I'm sick of the left's "You're on your own" obsession, but I'll bite. 
"You're on your own" is a MUCH MUCH MUCH better thing to hear than: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you." 

I love not being an American.

[AmericanNation]

I'm sick of the left's "You're on your own" obsession, but I'll bite. 
"You're on your own" is a MUCH MUCH MUCH better thing to hear than: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you." 

That depends entirely on one's particular situation, as I once dared to hope was obvious.

Also, "You're on your own" general means "Freedom and Free Markets are better than serfdom and Central Planning, so I won't impose the latter on you." 

Which is, of course, a false dichotomy and the people saying it know it, even if you don't.

Unless you have a magic plan to reverse a march to serfdom after it starts, than there isn't anything false about the dichotomy and if you honestly think about it for ten minutes you can't deny that.  You might think its 'doomsday-ish.'  IDK how to get around your feelings when referencing the facts of History.  Respectfully, maybe you should get around your feelings and think.      

[Brittain33]

I'm sick of the left's "You're on your own" obsession, but I'll bite. 
"You're on your own" is a MUCH MUCH MUCH better thing to hear than: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you." 

[Adam Griffin]

Unless you have a magic plan to reverse a march to serfdom after it starts, than there isn't anything false about the dichotomy and if you honestly think about it for ten minutes you can't deny that.  You might think its 'doomsday-ish.'  IDK how to get around your feelings when referencing the facts of History.  Respectfully, maybe you should get around your feelings and think.      

I'm wondering how many "facts of History" and non-feeling statements you feel like you've conveyed here?

[Oakvale]

This new R-WI troll is great, he's like a computer program that shoves Fox News memes into common sentence structures and prints the result.

Sidenote: The R-WI avatar has a pretty bad history, doesn't it? Not quite equal to the (almost!) entirely negative connotations of R-IN, but it might be getting there.

[Democratic Hawk]

Unless you have a magic plan to reverse a march to serfdom after it starts, than there isn't anything false about the dichotomy and if you honestly think about it for ten minutes you can't deny that.  You might think its 'doomsday-ish.'  IDK how to get around your feelings when referencing the facts of History.  Respectfully, maybe you should get around your feelings and think.       

The Republican Party-nomics of elite-enrichment, middle class emaciation and waged slavery has proven itself to be the Road to Serfdom. It was liberalism that saved capitalism from the ravages of the Depression the result being that for ordinary people (i.e. the middle and working class) the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, in terms of prosperity (i.e. rising standards of living), were the best three decades ever

If the 'Crash of 2008' has taught me one thing its the danger of wealth becoming increasingly concentrated in the hands of the few. Had Bush 43 built on the somewhat more broad-based prosperity of the Clinton era, his presidency wouldn't have ended as it did. The wealthiest, believe it or not, thrive more when the middle and working class do but for some reason (and it can only be dogmatic ) you guys, obviously, don't get that!

[AmericanNation]

"I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."  picture
1)I feel so bad for those people in New Orleans who were mislead their entire lives to think “The government will help you, don't worry about it” and inevitably government fails to deliver.
2)[I'm wondering how many "facts of History" and non-feeling statements you feel like you've conveyed here?]
I'm not going to write a book for you in a forum.  Go educate yourself or at least read a little, that is not my responsibility.  If you have a question state it and I may lend you my historical expertise.  
3)[It was liberalism that saved capitalism from the ravages of the Depression ]
I don't even like the use of the word 'liberalism' because it becomes completely meaningless.  Lets say you meant FDR saved capitalism... that is of course nonsense.  FDR's first two terms were a complete disaster.  Some things were not his doing others were and FDR made many mistakes that disqualify him from being a “savior of capitalism.”  In his third term he was forced out of necessity to reverse his war on business in order to build a war economy.  That reversal and half of the world in ashes led to the prosperity you're talking about.

[Oakvale]

"I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."  picture

Proof!

[King]

March to serfdom? That's a new one.  Hopefully it doesn't spread like a wildfire a la "class warfare" and "Saul Alinsky radicals."

[Democratic Hawk]

I don't even like the use of the word 'liberalism' because it becomes completely meaningless.  

More meaningful than 'conservatism' given the FACT that its democratic capitalism's hegemonic ideology

[AmericanNation]

I don't even like the use of the word 'liberalism' because it becomes completely meaningless.  

More meaningful than 'conservatism' given the FACT that its democratic capitalism's one - and only - hegemonic ideology. Furthermore, there is nothing Burkean, even remotely rational, about the contemporary GOP

Exactly my point! you are talking about Classical Liberalism which is probably a good way to describe my ideology - (in part anyway...complexities).  FDR was perhaps the antithesis of Classical Liberalism.  Thus, 'Liberalism' starts meaning nothing and everything and it's a junk loaded word.  You can't call Thomas Jefferson and Fidel Castro "Liberals" it drives me nuts.       

[AmericanNation]

March to serfdom? That's a new one.  Hopefully it doesn't spread like a wildfire a la "class warfare" and "Saul Alinsky radicals."

FYI “The Road to Serfdom” is among the most influential books of all time.  Maybe get the sparknotes.

[Adam Griffin]

This new R-WI troll is great, he's like a computer program that shoves Fox News memes into common sentence structures and prints the result.

Right?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not asking you to write a book. There's plenty of room on these forums to express your opinions and conjecture without having to cite it. What I'm calling you out on - and what others will continue to do - is how you want to crap on everyone else, talking about how they're not using facts and how we're all "feeling" instead of thinking. Guess what? You're not using facts either. You're simply making broad-based statements ("freedom is under attack, government's gunna getcha, road to serfdom") without backing them up with any facts. Even your more elaborate thoughts are conjecture, although a little bit better thought out.

Let's not even get on the psychological points of how you guys "think" (feel). You seem to be in denial about what constitutes a rational thought. Liberals think, rationalize and try to debate with numbers, statistics and facts. That's why we get called "elitists" and "out of touch". Conservatives feel the situation in their gut ("I just know Obama's a muslim!") and conjecture based on what their head tells them (whether it's religion, politics or life in general).

You may want to cool the antagonistic tones you're taking toward everybody. People who act like aggressive little sh**ts don't last that long, on average.

[AmericanNation]

This new R-WI troll is great, he's like a computer program that shoves Fox News memes into common sentence structures and prints the result.

Right?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not asking you to write a book. There's plenty of room on these forums to express your opinions and conjecture without having to cite it. What I'm calling you out on - and what others will continue to do - is how you want to crap on everyone else, talking about how they're not using facts and how we're all "feeling" instead of thinking. Guess what? You're not using facts either. You're simply making broad-based statements ("freedom is under attack, government's gunna getcha, road to serfdom") without backing them up with any facts. Even your more elaborate thoughts are conjecture, although a little bit better thought out.

Let's not even get on the psychological points of how you guys "think" (feel). You seem to be in denial about what constitutes a rational thought. Liberals think, rationalize and try to debate with numbers, statistics and facts. That's why we get called "elitists" and "out of touch". Conservatives feel the situation in their gut ("I just know Obama's a muslim!") and conjecture based on what their head tells them (whether it's religion, politics or life in general).

You may want to cool the antagonistic tones you're taking toward everybody. People who act like aggressive little sh**ts don't last that long, on average.

Is that your life experience in Georgia?  I have wondered if the dynamic flips in the deep south.  Elitist claims tend to flow from dismissive-ness that ignores the point.  You stumbled on my razor that a dumb republican may have idiotic reasoning, yet is more likely to come to the correct result whereas a dumb democrat may have some reasoning (usually emotional appeal), but inevitably comes to the wrong conclusion.  I maintain hope smart people can rise above.     

[Adam Griffin]

Is that your life experience in Georgia?  I have wondered if the dynamic flips in the deep south.  Elitist claims tend to flow from dismissive-ness that ignores the point.  You stumbled on my razor that a dumb republican may have idiotic reasoning, yet is more likely to come to the correct result whereas a dumb democrat may have some reasoning (usually emotional appeal), but inevitably comes to the wrong conclusion.  I maintain hope smart people can rise above.     

You should check out my profile, see where I live and compare that with the Atlas. I wouldn't hold Cheesehead Republicanism in any higher regard, however; it looks as if your legislature is more extreme than ours. The Democrats and the Tea Party actually worked together here to defeat our union-busting bill and the abortion legislation was watered down to 20 weeks (which even as a far-left social liberal, I find acceptable), and that's with nearly 2/3 Republicans in the legislature.

You should look at how you've been typing over the past 15 or so posts. If you had started off with the same style that you are using now, then there would have been more initial respect for what you are conveying. 

[AmericanNation]

Is that your life experience in Georgia?  I have wondered if the dynamic flips in the deep south.  Elitist claims tend to flow from dismissive-ness that ignores the point.  You stumbled on my razor that a dumb republican may have idiotic reasoning, yet is more likely to come to the correct result whereas a dumb democrat may have some reasoning (usually emotional appeal), but inevitably comes to the wrong conclusion.  I maintain hope smart people can rise above.     

You should check out my profile, see where I live and compare that with the Atlas. I wouldn't hold Cheesehead Republicanism in any higher regard, however; it looks as if your legislature is more extreme than ours. The Democrats and the Tea Party actually worked together here to defeat our union-busting bill and the abortion legislation was watered down to 20 weeks (which even as a far-left social liberal, I find acceptable), and that's with nearly 2/3 Republicans in the legislature.

You should look at how you've been typing over the past 15 or so posts. If you had started off with the same style that you are using now, then there would have been more initial respect for what you are conveying. 

I have remained consistent, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.  The Republicans in Wisconsin have been brilliantly mainstream.  I don't think your "extreme" label can be justified, but I'd listen to your point if you have one. 
FYI
1)Never busted a Union
2)Is there an abortion bill you're talking about?  what's wrong with it?
 

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I don't wanna get into this too much, but I just wanna make one point about "gut-Republicanism."

Point:

It's not that bad.

Looking on the US from the outside, it seems less like you have to be apologetic for what you believe in. In Canada, you really, really do. Free market capitalism? Cut government spending? What a heartless douchebag! At least that gut-Republicanism is unabashed. If you're a gut-Democrat it seems to me that you're hopping on the social awareness bandwagon without necessarily thinking things through.

I guess that's my gut talking.

[Adam Griffin]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nope. From:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

to:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Keep in mind that no "facts" had been provided. Now we're here and there's a definite increase in the quality of your conversational skills.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Historically, yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Besides parts of it being struck down, I'm guessing we won't see eye to eye on what the anti-union bill in your state does. I think we can agree, however, that it certainly eliminated the brilliantly mainstream Republican majority in the Senate. Here's a total of four bills (three anti-abortion, one anti-contraception) that Walker just signed this week.
 

[retromike22]

Stop fighting kids. What I originally intended my post to mean, was that Romney is sounding too harsh in his non-use of government to solve problems. He's sounding more like an anarchist than a conservative.

I would rather hear "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" than "You're on your own." simply because as a member of the working class, it feels like we've been on our own for a while and could use some help.

For example, my health insurance was going to run out when I turned 25, but I got it for an additional year under my parents because of Obamacare.

So if Obama is providing further assistance to make my life easier, and Romney is promising to do nothing for me, why should I vote for Romney? Because I live in paranoid fear that maybe, possibly, the smallest government assistance will lead to a future fascist or communist state? I don't think so. There aren't only two choices: 1, Of individual freedom but no government help, and 2, a centralized economy with no personal freedom.

It is possible, and normal, to have individual freedom and government assistance. You're forgetting the possibility of the welfare state, where personal freedom exists along with government assistance to make live easier. Welfare states such as Sweden are not suffering under the tyranny of their governments. They aren't marching toward fascism or communism.

When conservatives talk about "freedom" they are confusing the freedom of expression with the freedom of anarchy. People do want the freedom to choose their profession, to live where they want, and do express themselves freely without government intervention. But people do not want the freedom from a minimum wage so that they have less money, the freedom from food safety laws so that their food may be unclean, or the freedom from police and firefighters so that they can live in constantly dangerous world.

[AmericanNation]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nope. From:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

to:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Keep in mind that no "facts" had been provided. Now we're here and there's a definite increase in the quality of your conversational skills.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Historically, yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Besides parts of it being struck down, I'm guessing we won't see eye to eye on what the anti-union bill in your state does. I think we can agree, however, that it certainly eliminated the brilliantly mainstream Republican majority in the Senate. Here's a total of four bills (three anti-abortion, one anti-contraception) that Walker just signed this week.
 

So, you don't like the first one? or the second one is really nice compared to the first one? or the second one is mean?  I'm not sure how you feel about them. 

The majority ended?  The Legislature is out of session.  A senator resigned for family reasons at the end of the session.  She probably didn't like the harassment and death threats either.  She also has a medical practice to run. 

As for the "war on women" stuff.  Didn't manufacturing that issue blow up in Chicago's face the last few days? 
The Wisconsin Dems are pathetically pinning their hopes on it anyway.
Wis Dem Spokesman Zielinski, In Lefty Publication, Admits Collective Bargaining Issue Not Hurting Walker; Dems Will Instead Focus On "War on Women" and "Secret" John Doe
http://motherjones.com/politics/2012/04/scott-walker-recall-wisconsin-democrat-union

         

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Obama - I'm from the government, and here are my chicago thugs. Payup for healthcare.

Romney - I'm from the government, and here are my mormon homeboys, Payup for healthcare.

Neither candidate wants to leave me alone.