Hi Gordon- I went back and reread the transcript dealing with the 47%, and I still hold the opinion that if he said something like 20%, it would have come out far better. He didn't just come out with this statement, so I don't think he had previously thought about what he should say. It was made to answer a question. ***Question- "For the last three years, all everybody's been told is, "Don't worry, we'll take care of you." How are you going to do it, in two months before the elections, to convince everybody you've got to take care of yourself?"*** So he's being asked how do you convince people to not rely on government and take personal responsibility. He's correct, for a certain percentage, he'll never convince them, nor will anyone else. However, it isn't anywhere near 47%. Romney called for the full release of the tape, as his remarks to that question were cut short by what was released. Mother Jones, that released the tape, has said that a couple of minutes are unfortunately missing, it just so happens that the only thing missing for the most part is his explanation to this one question. Just dumb luck or is the missing part clarifying or correcting his remarks and were selectively editited? We might never know.
To his remark, "I'd have a better chance of getting elected president if I were Mexican", I would say that wasn't really his statement. Here is the exact statement taken from a transcript, so I'm guessing it is correct. ***"...my dad, you probably know, was the governor of Michigan and was the head of a car company, but he was born in Mexico. And had he been born of Mexican parents I'd have a better shot at winning this, but he was unfortunately born of Americans living in Mexico. They'd lived there for a number of years, and, uh, I mean I say that jokingly, but it'd be helpful if they'd been Latino" *** So he came straight out and said it was a joke, so I'm going to take his word for it and assume it was. So what is the joke? I'm guessing, but I don't know anymore than you, that he's saying he would pickup more of the Latino vote if he could claim to be Latino. A good number of people thought that picking Rubio for VP could have helped with the Latino vote. Obama certainly picks up a few more shares of the black vote by being black, they did come out 4 years ago in record numbers. But if it is politically incorrect to suggest that, then I would say to look at Samuel Jackson's comments concerning color and voting.
I thought you had a statement about his drug use, or perhaps I've been smoking something? Since I'm at work, I often times have to bounce around between screens and systems if I get phone calls or clients in the office, so I'm guessing you might have already seen that information and taken the question out. Let me say, I don't care what the president did in high school or college. I doubt he did anything that I haven't done, and sometimes still do. When I worked at a lumber company through my later high school and college summers, I worked with some young men that would blow a whole weeks pay on 'goodies' for the weekend. Of course, they then didn't have money to fix their car or were short on rent money etc. My point is about having priorities. Was the president dumpster diving for a table with a bag of weed in his pocket that he had just purchased? How many people are there that can't afford health insurance but somehow manage to keep the fridge stocked well with beer and never go without their cigarettes?
For your last statement about 47% being composed of the elderly, military etc., I agree with you, that is why I said the percentage he used was totally wrong. I'm not a cold person. I do believe in giving people a helping hand. I work with people who live on the margins, they work hard but struggle. I can tell you that some people need help, but make too much to qualify for some assistance they need, but they earn too little to easily keep their heads out of the water. These are the people I would like to see get more help. I also work with some that don't work, are pregnant with their fourth child from as many fathers, and while they don't live the life I would want to live, they seem to get by with less stress than those who struggle but do work, including at times yours truely. There are those who tell me they are on disability, and then proceed to tell me how good the fishing is in the river. Of course, I would like to be there with them, but I need to work. In my opinion, this isn't at all fair. But what do you do, not help the kids? Not help those that are truely disabled? I suggest only that the system is broken, not that the answers are easy.
I wouldn't mind seeing an increase in the tax of top earners, of course in full disclosure, I'm nowhere close to being in that group. But I wouldn't like to see the taxes raised just so government can increase in size that much more, to pay down the debt would be fine. I would wager that most of the top earners probably live in democratic districts, and it certainly would take the whole tax 'fairness' issue off the table. However, I don't think for one minute that the government increasing the taxes on my rich neighbor will raise my standard of living one bit. I would bet instead that, especially with a democrat majority, it would be used to grow government and entitlement spending that much more, which in my opinion, would only then do more harm.
Hope you have a good weekend.
Kevin
Of course, I've only been working and paying all required taxes and other contributions for some 42 years to date. I learned from Mitt that this apparently means nothing and I will be sucking off the Government's breast. This would also include many retirees who are currently collecting Social Security.
