Image: Joe Raedle, Getty Images
OK, by now, you’d have to live in under a rock or have been partying all week in Thailand (I’d prefer the latter) to not have heard Mitt Romney’s latest gaffe, showing him as an elitist who is out of touch with the common man. But, in case you were in Patpong or Soi Cowboy, here it is:
“I’m not concerned about the very poor,” he said. “We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it. I’m not concerned about the very rich; they’re doing just fine. I’m concerned about the very heart of America, the 90%, 95% of Americans right now who are struggling, and I’ll continue to take that message across the nation.”
Pretty bad, huh? Mitt’s not concerned about the very poor because they are being taken care of. Here’s my question. If they are being taken care of, how come they are still very poor? If we are taking care of Americans, then why does this USA Today story indicate that the number of the poor is likely to rise?
This brings me to my next point; I want to examine Mitt’s next sentence. It’s an important one.
“We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it,” Romney said.
Find the loaded word in that quote. I’ll give you a hint: It starts with “I” and ends with “F.” IF the safety net needs repair, he’ll fix it? IF? Just how out of tune with reality is Willard?
According to the USA Today story linked above, a record number of Americans, almost one in two, have fallen into poverty or are scraping by on earnings that classify them as low income. Almost one in two? Now, I’m a writer and a videographer and a lover (I kid), not a math guy, but isn’t almost one in two, almost half? That’s the math that I came up with. Holy crap! And Mitt’s not sure if there’s a problem or not? Wow!
Now you may think I’ve dissected that sentence about as much as I can, but we’ve got one more major point to make. Mitt says, “If it needs repair, I’ll fix it.”
Here’s the rub: he’s lying. He won’t fix a thing.
According to his own website, Romney states that, if elected, he would sign the Ryan plan, signaling major cuts to the “safety net” that Mitt says is taking care of the very poor that he doesn’t care about because they are being taken care of.
How do you take care of the poor by cutting the programs they rely on? You don’t.
‘President Romney’ is hedging his bets. He’s hoping by the time re-election comes around the poor will be dead, in prison or too high to vote him out of office. He’s banking on a great deal of voter disenfranchment to keep those people from rising up against him. Keeping them as poor as possible helps that cause.
Make no bones about it, this isn’t the first verbal gaffe Mitt Romney has made during this campaign but it may be the most egregious. But then again, you never know, this is Mitt Romney were talking about. Maybe he’d bet me 10 grand that he could go the rest of the election without putting his foot in his mouth again. It’s hard to say. Sucker bet, though.
___________________
My mother-in-law posted this on Romney’s Facebook page yesterday:
“I am one of the poor that you don’t care about. My husband and I worked hard and paid our taxes, paid into Social Security. Our gross retirement benefits from Social Security is $1891 per month. Our required supplemental insurance is $385 per month. So far this winter we have paid well over $1,000 for heating oil. Our electric bill runs about $150 per month. After we pay the mandated bills each month we have approximately $650 left for groceries and medication copays each month. Our propery tax is about $6,000 per year, with the senior discount, and we need to scrape that out of our $650. Property insurance is $205 per month. Our SS benefits have been cut, leaving us balances on medical care. We are custodians of our two grandchildren, and their Medicaid benefits have been cut as of January, 2012. We do not qualify for any welfare benefits because of our gross income. Fortunately, we own our home but foresee it being taken for property taxes in the near future. You tell me that there’s a safety net under us. I’d like to see you cope with what we have.”
I think she tells the story very well for the people Romney says he’s not concerned with. He’s not concerned because he doesn’t care.
This is the first election year when I can honestly say that I’m scared for the future of the United States.
I know it sounds like a tired cliche but the only way to not be scared for the future is to keep fighting — and that means keeping BOTH parties’ feet to the fire. When politicians and staggeringly wealthy corporate raiders who hope to lead the nation make statements about how the very poor have safety nets it tells me we still have a really long way to go in this country. The messages need to be changed and we have to keep getting the word out that the safety nets are under constant attack and, unfortunately, many people who rely on those nets support and vote for the very people who are trying to cut away those nets.
I’m so glad your mother in law posted what she did and where she did (I wonder if they wiped that comment off Romney’s Facebook page by now?). Let others know what she’s going through and push both Democrats and Republicans into doing what they’ve been hired to do: look out for the well-being of their constituents.
Thanks for that comment, Mr. Storch; please keep visiting us here and help spread the word!
This is a great article. When I heard his statement repeated on The Daily Show I could not believe it (oh, wait, yes I could) Speaking as one of the “poor” the safety net is bullshit. We need opportunity, not all of our hard earned money going to taxes while Romney takes his private jet.
Panama says thanks Angelle. There is hope. Romney has run a very poor campaign so far. He won the Nevada caucus but 11,000 fewer people voted in 2012 than did in 2008. He’s not inspiring the vote.
It’s amazing to me how many of his supporters don’t seem to realise that they’re supporting someone who wouldn’t think twice about tossing them into a gutter. The Ron Paul supporters are in the same boat; let’s see how much people like that ‘every man for himself’ libertarianism when disasters strike (whether it’s unemployment or an oil spill) and there’s none of that “evil big government”around to take care of the problems.