Video: Romney “not concerned about the very poor, we have a safety net”

posted at 9:50 am on February 1, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Earlier today, I said that only Mitt Romney could derail Mitt Romney this month.  Did my prediction come true already?  The media and Romney detractors have jumped all over this statement to CNN in which Romney says that he is “not concerned about the very poor,” but that slice of Romney’s statement is entirely misleading — although it’s certainly not adept for a front-runner:

The Washington Post, to its credit, quotes the entire statement rather than just parsing out the controversial fragment:

In an interview with CNN Wednesday morning that should have been a Florida victory lap, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney made a fumble that could give rivals an attack ad sound bite.

Asked about his economic plan, Romney said repeatedly that he was not concerned with very poor Americans, but was focused instead on helping the middle class.

Romney explained that he was confident that food stamps, housing vouchers, Medicaid and other assistance would keep the poor afloat — he pledged to fix holes in that safety net “if it needs repair.” He repeated past statements that his main focus is the middle class because those people, in his opinion, have been hardest hit by the recession (President Obama also has focused many of his efforts on the middle class).

But Romney’s awkward phrasing could give fuel to critics who argue that he does not empathize with the poorest Americans.

Well, only if the statement gets taken out of context, where Romney clearly commits to keeping safety-net programs in place for the very poor.  Unfortunately for Romney, there won’t be any easier prediction this year than that the truncated quote will end up in attack ads all year long, taken out of context.  The only question will be whether those attacks are limited to Democrats, or if other Republicans will join in on the fun.

In that sense, this is still a gaffe and a worrisome misstep for someone who has been on the campaign trail as long as Romney.  Candidates are supposed to express concern for everyone, not just one particular class, which gets to the more substantial error Romney makes.  As author Brad Thor pointed out on Twitter, the focus should be on fixing the economy so that everyone benefits rather than playing one class against another, as Barack Obama has done.  Romney fell into a class-warfare trap, one he should have seen coming.  It’s not fatal by any means, but Romney had better sharpen himself more for a general election campaign.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 6

Yeah, really dumb wording, sure to appear on Democrat attack ads.

WannabeAnglican on February 1, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Republicans: doing to themselves what the Dems were going to do anyway.

WordsMatter on February 1, 2012 at 9:54 AM

He’s absolutely right but maybe he should craft his message more carefully. Whatever he does he will be portrayed as Mr. Burns from the Simpsons – the heartless filthy rich evil businessman from hell.

Then again, when it comes to those who are very poor and on every one of the hundreds of benefits we offer – a) do they vote and b) do they vote Republican?

The phrase Regan Democrats makes sense. I’ve never heard of Welfare Republicans.

CorporatePiggy on February 1, 2012 at 9:54 AM

LOBOTOMY4LIFE will be here in 5.4.3.2…

KOOLAID2 on February 1, 2012 at 9:54 AM

It’s not that he doesn’t believe in class warfare… he’s just on a different team

…. every other day

lm10001 on February 1, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Another passive aggressive, might be bad, could be bad, probably is bad, but not really, article. It’s going to be a long 9 months.

BettyRuth on February 1, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Rehash the headline topic!

Sing it, brother Mitt, I don’t care anymore.

Bishop on February 1, 2012 at 9:55 AM

Well, only if the statement gets taken out of context, where Romney clearly commits to keeping safety-net programs in place for the very poor.

Yup, it would be such a stretch otherwise as to result in severe sprains.

whatcat on February 1, 2012 at 9:56 AM

Tingles and DWS the happiest people right about now

Out of context be damned

Use that sucker

cmsinaz on February 1, 2012 at 9:56 AM

I’m more concerned about the in-context quote.

Romney just ok’d entitlements and essentially said no reform is needed. He’s a BIG govt guy, and now everyone knows. He’s playing class warfare. He should be concerned about everyone. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

conservative pilgrim on February 1, 2012 at 9:56 AM

Since when does context matter wrt soundbites. Point DNC.

Fallon on February 1, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Look, it doesn’t really matter. The MSM was going to use this line of attack against him anyways. Double Facepalm that he just adds fuel to the fire…but he’s the “only one” that is electable anyways, remember? Oh, and I’m sure he’s racist too.

search4truth on February 1, 2012 at 9:58 AM

In that sense, this is still a gaffe and a worrisome misstep for someone who has been on the campaign trail as long as Romney. Candidates are supposed to express concern for everyone, not just one particular class, which gets to the more substantial error Romney makes.

Exactly. If Mittens quit trying to divide Americans into classes and prioritizing one over the other, these kinds of gaffes wouldn’t happen. How about trying to help ALL Americans, Willard? There’s a novel concept. A rising tide lifts all boats. Or pick your own cliche if you prefer.

It’s moments like this that validate people like Palin and Rush wanting this thing to keep going as long as possible. First of all, so we don’t make a huge mistake nominating someone with “foot in mouth” disease. As I recall, that’s what essentially destroyed Perry’s campaign, so Mittens doesn’t deserve any more slack. And secondly it’ll help sharpen these candidates so they don’t offer up horrible soundbites like this.

And before anyone mentions how Dems say stupid things as well, I’m well aware of that. Obama himself had the infamous “bitter clingers” remark. But there are two things to remember with that. Obama said it behind closed doors, whereas Mittens blurted this out on live TV on CNN of all places! And the media will never play fair when a Republican says something like this vs. a Democrat(especially Obama).

Doughboy on February 1, 2012 at 9:58 AM

He hates the poor..

too rich..too out of touch…

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 9:58 AM

I’ve already commented on this twice now, so yeah…awkward phrasing, but in context it’s clear what he was saying.

changer1701 on February 1, 2012 at 9:58 AM

Romney fell into a class-warfare trap, one he should have seen coming. It’s not fatal by any means, but Romney had better sharpen himself more for a general election campaign.

Do the very poor vote?

Happy Nomad on February 1, 2012 at 9:58 AM

don’t worry, Newt will seize on this and toss out accusations that Mitt wants to make the poor kids work as janitors at school

gatorboy on February 1, 2012 at 9:58 AM

The guy made a mistake. The number of mistakes he has made in this campaign can be counted on one hand. Move along, folks. Nothing to see here.

rogaineguy on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Did he just praise food-stamps? Way to go, Willard.

Masih ad-Dajjal on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Well, only if the statement gets taken out of context, where Romney clearly commits to keeping safety-net programs in place for the very poor.

But, Ed, this is another problem. One of the bigger gripes with Mitt is that there’s no real underlying vision. No “big idea”, if you will. What Mitt’s saying is that the current “safety net”-with one such being food stamps, seeing a 45% increase since 2009-needs to be maintained! No talk about providing economic mobility and freedom, no talk about personhood and dependency. Nothing. CNN gave him an opportunity in the interview to do that, but he didn’t take it. Why?

Weight of Glory on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

I do not blame him. Rich people hate the poor. During my time in college the rich folks didn’t want to hang with us because we were from poor backgrounds. They despise the working poor and look down upon us for not being wealthy

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Romney just ok’d entitlements and essentially said no reform is needed. He’s a BIG govt guy, and now everyone knows. He’s playing class warfare. He should be concerned about everyone. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

conservative pilgrim on February 1, 2012 at 9:56 AM

Famous last words: “Strengthen the safety net.”

Conservatism is nowhere near this man’s heart. He read about it once in an article.

How about this:

“As we strengthen the economy by reducing government, private employers will be able to create jobs and opportunity, and that’s what the very poor really want: opportunity. And that’s the America I intend to deliver.”

But no…

beatcanvas on February 1, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Thank God the conservative media destroyed Newt. Now we have no candidate.

BuckNutty on February 1, 2012 at 10:01 AM

Well I guess this means that all the liberals and the very poor won’t vote for Romney this time around. Lol, did we ever think they would?

Only libs and the very poor would be clueless enough to take that quote so out of context. I just hope for Newt that he is smart enough to leave this one alone. Claiming this means Romney hates the poor would just be dishonest.

mitchellvii on February 1, 2012 at 10:01 AM

The Republican base needs to support and vote for Mitt Romney if he succeeds in securing the nomination. Why?

“If Barack Obama gets re-elected, it will be a disaster for the United States of America. Make no bones about it. If he can have a record this bad, unemployment this bad, deficits this bad, policies this bad, gasoline prices this high, and still get re-elected, you can’t imagine how radical he’ll be in his second term.” – Newt Gingrich 1/31/2012

Its that simple.

jazzmo on February 1, 2012 at 10:01 AM

Gitcha act together Romney

blatantblue on February 1, 2012 at 10:01 AM

If the safety net needs repair, it’s usually because the people already in the net are too fat.

RBMN on February 1, 2012 at 10:01 AM

Newt:

Barack Obama is the Food Stamp President.

Mitt:

I’m not concerned about the poor; let them eat food stamps!

steebo77 on February 1, 2012 at 10:01 AM

Mr. Morrissey- George Neumayr at American Specator has an op-ed Titled ROMNEY’S CHEAP & EMPTY WIN.TO say it’s spot on is an understatement. If you haven’t read it yet.it is worth the time.

pamiam on February 1, 2012 at 10:01 AM

He hates the poor..

too rich..too out of touch…

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 9:58 AM

Yeah….that’s why he gives more to charity that all other politicians combined…..

BettyRuth on February 1, 2012 at 10:01 AM

Gitcha act together Romney

blatantblue on February 1, 2012 at 10:01 AM

hr can’t it is not in his DNA. He cannot relate to the poor. Too rich, too out of touch

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 10:02 AM

I do not blame him. Rich people hate the poor. During my time in college the rich folks didn’t want to hang with us because we were from poor backgrounds. They despise the working poor and look down upon us for not being wealthy
liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Wow! U really are delusional aren’t you?

mrscullen on February 1, 2012 at 10:02 AM

If this interviewer represents approximately 51% of the American population, everything that you hold dear is already lost. Face it.

If “the middle-income Americans” that he is talking about vote against him for saying this, everything that you hold dear is already lost. Face it.

It looks as if Mitt is too “conservative” to win. That is the charge.

kunegetikos on February 1, 2012 at 10:02 AM

One billion dollars in campaign funding can run that truncated phrase several million times.

DaveyNC on February 1, 2012 at 10:03 AM

I’m not concerned about “the poor” either. I think most middle-class people will understand what he means, and frankly most of us are tired of propping them up with freebies. Let them go for him with this, though. I want to see what kind of fire he has in his belly.

SouthernGent on February 1, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Yeah….that’s why he gives more to charity that all other politicians combined…..

BettyRuth on February 1, 2012 at 10:01 AM

It is very easy to give 6 million to Charity when you are worth over 250 million

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 10:04 AM

No talk about providing economic mobility and freedom, no talk about personhood and dependency. Nothing. CNN gave him an opportunity in the interview to do that, but he didn’t take it. Why?

Weight of Glory on February 1, 2012

Because he truly is, in substance, the out of touch rich guy caricature he is made out to be.

JonPrichard on February 1, 2012 at 10:04 AM

An impolitic utterance to say the least, maybe Mitt needs a teleprompter.

idesign on February 1, 2012 at 10:05 AM

And you’ll see Gingrich girfriends on Fox News saying the race has to go on because Romney is an evil rich establishment guy who doesn’t care for poor people in 5,4,3,2…

Falz on February 1, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Well, at least he doesn’t try to act like he cares – this may be one of those rare occasions when Mitt speaks the truth. I can’t wait to hear big, fat, slobbering Moon-Newt’s wacko response (complete with fake-outrage whining).

Pork-Chop on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

BREAKING: Mitt’s talking points are not liberal enough for HotGas readers.

kunegetikos on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

I do not blame him. Rich people hate the poor. During my time in college the rich folks didn’t want to hang with us because we were from poor backgrounds. They despise the working poor and look down upon us for not being wealthy

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

You’re such an idiot, spouting endless made-up bullshit.

I was homeless in the ’80′s in Modesto, California. I went door to door every day asking if I could wash the windows of the people who lived there. The people who could afford to pay me were rich people, and because you’re a talking point echo chamber with no real world experience, you have no concept of the extreme generosity I received, both in the work I was given and in the heartfelt compassion I received by the rich.

The most generous people I’ve ever known were rich people, and the vast majority of them earned their wealth – it wasn’t handed to them.

Don’t be a putz.

beatcanvas on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

At this stage, the only positive aspect to this gaffe is that a prolonged primary might improve Romney’s abilities not to make such campaign-crushing errors in the General Election.

God help us all.

Mutnodjmet on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Conservatives keep saying Romney should speak out more, not canned stump speeches, and yet as soon as you find a few words strung together, you want him to put a sock in it. Newt gets PRAISES for upsetting the journalists this way.

We all know what he means. Barach Obama is going around the country saying he wants to make everyone equal financially, EQUALLY poor.

If you are poor now, and you had good credit during the Bush years, I hope you don’t identify with the Occupiers, that is no future for me or you.

Every person with good credit during the Bush years that has lost their home, would not have been in that situation if Obama had encouraged Business to come back right away. Obama’s policies are the policies of stagnation.

Obama is going around telling the poor they are the new middle class and he wants them to have a fair share in the goodies. Free this and that. It is class warfare. A poor person without a job, according to Barack Obama should have an equal life to the working class or middle class person, and free college, and free cell phones and free homes.

Don’t pick on Romney for saying he is not worried about the poor, they have programs. Obama wants everyone to live that way, and Mrs. Obama? she thinks we should all give up the boardroom to become social workers.

Fleuries on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

I do not blame him. Rich people hate the poor. During my time in college the rich folks didn’t want to hang with us because we were from poor backgrounds. They despise the working poor and look down upon us for not being wealthy

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

I wasn’t particularly well-off growing up, but I certainly had several “rich” friends in college. Maybe you are just an insufferable loser. Ever think of that?

steebo77 on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Oh for Christ’s sake people… really?
We’re to the point that we can’t take folks’ words in their full context? That’s why we get absolute bland BS out of anyone running for anything today. Don’t give your opponents ammo! Screw it.
What he said wasn’t innacurate or even wrong.
Man alive, some “conservatives” need to breath into a bag.

Sugar Land on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

The poor will not get richer by tearing down the rich.

Newsflash.

Good Lt on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

hr can’t it is not in his DNA. He cannot relate to the poor. Too rich, too out of touch

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Are you poor? If not, you can’t relate to the poor either. You’re too rich, too out of touch. Only if you;re poor or have been poor can you relate. That doesn’t mean you don’t help the poor or have compassion.

Also, the “poor” in the United States are wealthy when compared to the poor of the world.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Fourth look at Gingrich?

Here’s your inevitable nominee, GOP!

Isn’t Ann Coulter smart?

Al-Ozarka on February 1, 2012 at 10:07 AM

The guy made a mistake. The number of mistakes he has made in this campaign can be counted on one hand. Move along, folks. Nothing to see here.

rogaineguy on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

At some point, these “mistakes” become overwhelming. The remark about how he liked firing people was fine. If you listed to the entire clip, there’s no way you could take away anything other than he enjoyed having the ability to get rid of service providers who do a lousy job. Who wouldn’t agree with that?

But in the past week, he’s said Obamacare is “not worth getting getting angry about” and now this choice soundbite where he says he’s not concerned about the very poor, praises the safety net(i.e. food stamps and welfare checks), and also plays into class warfare rhetoric by saying he’s not worried about “the rich” either. He can’t keep having moments like this. Particularly when a significant chunk of the base doesn’t like him and his unfavorables with independents are on the rise thanks to his scorched earth campaign tactics being employed to take out Newt.

Doughboy on February 1, 2012 at 10:07 AM

The poor will not get richer by tearing down the rich.

Newsflash.

Good Lt on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

They don’t know that. They’ll only get poorer.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 10:07 AM

I do not blame him. Rich people hate the poor. During my time in college the rich folks didn’t want to hang with us because we were from poor backgrounds. They despise the working poor and look down upon us for not being wealthy

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

They didn’t hang out with you because you OWS numbskulls don’t like to shower.

Good Lt on February 1, 2012 at 10:07 AM

He needs to 86 the expression in that photograph on the front page. It does nothing for his credibility.

flyfisher on February 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Churches and families need to take care of the very poor.

Government only creates more poor people, every dime transferred to the poor has been wasted and has only made the problem worse.

NoDonkey on February 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM

And wasn’t it Newt that was prone to this sort of thing?

cartooner on February 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Liberal4life is a bit out there, but are we really going to pretend that the wealthy kids at college make a point of hanging out with working class/poor kids? Are we going to make believe that a majority of wealthy college kids judge others based on their clothes (no chanel? Ew) or that when they take ski vacations to a friends winter home that everyone’s invited? This pretense that there’s no such thing as class in American society is utter bull. If class didn’t matter, why would anyone try and make money?

libfreeordie on February 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM

If Rick Perry had said this, we’d immediately hear about how stoopid and inarticulate he is.
Romney says it and the equivocations begin on cue.

Right Mover on February 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM

BREAKING: Mitt’s talking points are not liberal enough for HotGas readers.

kunegetikos on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

No, actually they are too liberal. His comments to CNN not only are supportive of big government welfare bureaucracies, but also go after the rich, engaging in the same kind of class warfare talk that Romney supporters have been whining about the entire past month.

steebo77 on February 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM

I wasn’t particularly well-off growing up, but I certainly had several “rich” friends in college. Maybe you are just an insufferable loser. Ever think of that?

steebo77 on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

He can’t comprehend that. Liberals are taught to categorize everyone by race, gender and money.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Not whoops, but yay. He is absolutely right. We have spent the last fifty years sucking up to the lazy and ignorant poor, the people who don’t give a care about working and have spent trillions of dollars “helping” people stay poor. The heck with them, I want a president who is worried about the workers of the country, hopefully the Swiss bank account candidate can focus on the workers rather than the idle poor.

Smedley on February 1, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Good thing Mitt is inevitable, or I’d be worried that he was going to get his clock cleaned by Obama.

dirtseller on February 1, 2012 at 10:09 AM

BREAKING: Mitt’s talking points are not liberal enough for HotGas readers.

kunegetikos on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Absolutely no sympathy here. Romney supporters jumped all over Newt when he suggested poor children do some menial labor for a few months or years to learn good work habits.

Doomberg on February 1, 2012 at 10:09 AM

It is very easy to give 6 million to Charity when you are worth over 250 million

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 10:04 AM

Oh is it?

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and his wife Michelle gave $10,772 of the $1.2 million they earned from 2000 through 2004 to charities, or less than 1 percent, according to tax returns for those years released today by his campaign.

Weight of Glory on February 1, 2012 at 10:10 AM

hr can’t it is not in his DNA. He cannot relate to the poor. Too rich, too out of touch

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Right.

And a doctor who never had cancer shouldn’t be able to treat you if he himself did not have cancer.

Because he can’t “relate.”

Your thinking. It makes perfect sense.

Good Lt on February 1, 2012 at 10:10 AM

It’s not that he doesn’t believe in class warfare… he’s just on a different team
…. every other day
lm10001 on February 1, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Thread winner?

Cleombrotus on February 1, 2012 at 10:10 AM

C’mon, sMittens people! They took his “I like to fire people” way out of context. There’s no reason to think this will be any different.

There’s Mitt Romney! Hey! he’s auditioning for the Gordon Gekko part!

cartooner on February 1, 2012 at 10:10 AM

Oh for Christ’s sake people… really?
We’re to the point that we can’t take folks’ words in their full context?
Sugar Land on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Perhaps you need to familiarize yourself with what Romney surrogates have been doing to Newt for weeks. They’ve done the same things to Perry, Huck, Fred and Rudy.

Stayright on February 1, 2012 at 10:11 AM

What if the wording was “I’m not as concerned about the poor…” Would this still be considered a ‘huge monstrous gaffe!!!’?

The Nerve on February 1, 2012 at 10:11 AM

If Rick Perry had said this

You guys should be pissed at Perry for being a quitter.

kunegetikos on February 1, 2012 at 10:11 AM

If Rick Perry had said this, we’d immediately hear about how stoopid and inarticulate he is.
Romney says it and the equivocations begin on cue.

Right Mover on February 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Agreed. How is this any better than the “heartless” moment? Hell, at least with that, Perry was coming at it from a bleeding heart perspective. He was still condescending and rude toward people who disagreed with him, but he was doing it from the POV of trying to help a certain group of people. Here, Mittens is openly saying he’s not worried about helping either the poor or the rich. Way to bring people together, champ.

Doughboy on February 1, 2012 at 10:11 AM

This pretense that there’s no such thing as class in American society is utter bull. If class didn’t matter, why would anyone try and make money?

libfreeordie on February 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM

The big difference in America though, is one can move from the poor “class” to the rich class, and if they make some bad moves go back to the poor class.

Of course the left would like to see people stay in their respective classes permanently.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 10:11 AM

I do not blame him. Rich people hate the poor. During my time in college the rich folks didn’t want to hang with us because we were from poor backgrounds. They despise the working poor and look down upon us for not being wealthy

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Maybe it was just you. I was poor and a few of my friends in college were from some of the richest families in Chicago. My roommate’s family was close friends with the Wisconsin Johnson’s (of Johnson & Johnson) and we chose to be roommates.

Romney is a clueless candidate but the rich do not hate the poor. If Romney does become president, I hope he is concerned with all Americans from the very poor, the working poor, the middle class, the entrepreneurial class all the way up to the very wealthy.

Fallon on February 1, 2012 at 10:11 AM

We’re to the point that we can’t take folks’ words in their full context? That’s why we get absolute bland BS out of anyone running for anything today. Don’t give your opponents ammo! Screw it.
What he said wasn’t innacurate or even wrong.
Man alive, some “conservatives” need to breath into a bag.

Sugar Land on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Hear, hear!

obladioblada on February 1, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Earlier today, I said that only Mitt Romney could derail Mitt Romney this month. Did my prediction come true already? The media and Romney detractors have jumped all over this statement to CNN in which Romney says that he is “not concerned about the very poor,” but that slice of Romney’s statement is entirely misleading — although it’s certainly not adept for a front-runner: – Ed

Well, that IS consistent with HIS theology.
Po’ folks get zero, zip, nada, null from the “LDS” unless of course you are one of them. Don’t believe me? Do a little research.
Pikers, and corrupt thieves. That 10% “tithing” benefits only fellow travelers.
Where’s the LSM who tried to educate the people re: Rev. Wright?
Sadly, too many Americans, especially the squishy, know-nothing “moderates” have no clue what Mittens and HIS people are all about.
I suspect that The One as “Huey Long with a better tailor”, (ht: George Will) will trot out the “cult” status in a heartbeat when Mittens is “immaculated” by a gaggle of so-called Republicans.
Mittens IS, after all, “The Romney Immaculate Deception.”
Caveat Emptor: Buyer beware … at your own risk, not mine!

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on February 1, 2012 at 10:12 AM

I’m more concerned about the in-context quote.

Romney just ok’d entitlements and essentially said no reform is needed. He’s a BIG govt guy, and now everyone knows. He’s playing class warfare. He should be concerned about everyone. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

conservative pilgrim on February 1, 2012 at 9:56 AM

+1 billion!

TXUS on February 1, 2012 at 10:12 AM

I do not blame him. Rich people hate the poor. During my time in college the rich folks didn’t want to hang with us because we were from poor backgrounds. They despise the working poor and look down upon us for not being wealthy

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

“Pity party of one, your table is ready”…

hillsoftx on February 1, 2012 at 10:12 AM

As I pointed out in the Headline thread…

The troubling thing here for conservatives is that Romney is tacitly (said implicitly in Headline, my mistake) approving of the government safety net.

This is not a conservative response at all.

Scott H on February 1, 2012 at 10:13 AM

Only the enlightened poor are actually paying attention to Romney, the others, if they vote are going to vote for their goodies with Obama. He gets them from his Stash.

Fleuries on February 1, 2012 at 10:13 AM

Newt wants to help the poor by stopping their dependence on welfare and food stamps.

Romney isn’t concerned about the poor, because they have a food stamp safety net.

Here’s all the contrast you need. Visionary vs. technocrat.

Masih ad-Dajjal on February 1, 2012 at 10:13 AM

at least …Perry was coming at it from a bleeding heart perspective [and]…was…condescending and rude toward [his own base]

Doughboy on February 1, 2012 at 10:11 AM

kunegetikos on February 1, 2012 at 10:14 AM

DERP !!!!!!!

– Mitt Romney

UltimateBob on February 1, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Romney is definitely going to have to choose his phrases a little more carefully here now that he is pretty much on auto-pilot for the nomination.

The MSM are going to be watching him like a hawk for slip-up, and phrases to take out of context.

kage on February 1, 2012 at 10:14 AM

What concerns me is the use of “safety net” versus welfare. It reveals that he plans on doing nothing about getting people off of welfare. He sounds more and more like a Democrat when he changes words to distort the truth. I’m sure when he caves to the Democratic Senate, the taxes that are raised will be called investments. We’ve hear all this before, a vote for Romney is a vote for the status quo.

lea on February 1, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Stupid, just stupid, I’d say it was a rookie mistake, but………….

Bmore on February 1, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Do the very poor vote?

Happy Nomad on February 1, 2012 at 9:58 AM

If the Lord Messiah tells them to.

shaloma on February 1, 2012 at 10:14 AM

He won’t be able to walk away from this very easily. A bit off topic, but……… we all need to remember what is at stake this election. There is a new Gingrich campaign ad that I think is one of the best. It’s short, comprehensive, appeals to young adults, and puts his moon comments in context. The beauty about the ad is that whomever wins the GOP nomination, it can be redone with their image and still have the same impact. Take a look: http://themorningspew.com/2012/02/01/never-again-will-we-bow-to-a-king/

bloggless on February 1, 2012 at 10:14 AM

He can’t comprehend that. Liberals are taught to categorize everyone by race, gender and money.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 10:09 AM

When I was studying history in college we always called that the “liberal grievance trifecta” (race, class, gender). So much paper has been wasted on slicing and dicing people along these lines, it’s really pathetic. Liberal historians (and social scientists, psychologists, attorneys, basket weavers, etc.) suffer from an abject lack of creativity.

steebo77 on February 1, 2012 at 10:15 AM

You guys are staking all your hopes on this guy? Well, he beats Gingrich, but dayum!

Landslide!

ElenaKagan on February 1, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Mutnodjmet on February 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Okay, that made me laugh on this depressing morning. Brava!

Fallon on February 1, 2012 at 10:15 AM

If Romney doubles down on that statement, as he usually does with most of his recent positions, he’ll have my enthusiastic support. Reagan was 100% right: if you don’t subsidize something you’ll have less of it.

Archivarix on February 1, 2012 at 10:15 AM

He hates the poor..

too rich..too out of touch…

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 9:58 AM

Does it bother you at all that people think you’re a ridiculous troll? You’re like the kid making farting noises in the back of a school assembly. I have to believe you have it in you to do better than that.

Paul-Cincy on February 1, 2012 at 10:16 AM

Romney is a clueless candidate but the rich do not hate the poor. If Romney does become president, I hope he is concerned with all Americans from the very poor, the working poor, the middle class, the entrepreneurial class all the way up to the very wealthy.

Fallon on February 1, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Good luck with your concern .
The problem is Romney does not understand what middle class is or what being poor is. He has never been one. His father was a multimillionaire. He has been privileged his whole life.

Too rich, too out of touch

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 10:17 AM

No, actually they are too liberal. His comments to CNN not only are supportive of big government welfare bureaucracies, but also go after the rich, engaging in the same kind of class warfare talk that Romney supporters have been whining about the entire past month.

steebo77 on February 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM

How is he engaging in class warfare? All he was getting at is that the very poor have resources, but his focus is middle-income Americans who’re being squeezed out the economy. He didn’t pit one group against another. He should’ve talked in broad strokes about helping everyone, and he needs to be much more political with his responses, but I don’t see any class warfare there.

changer1701 on February 1, 2012 at 10:17 AM

If Rick Perry had said this, we’d immediately hear about how stoopid and inarticulate he is.
Romney says it and the equivocations begin on cue.

Right Mover on February 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Exactly!

MontanaMmmm on February 1, 2012 at 10:17 AM

He’s right.

echosyst on February 1, 2012 at 10:17 AM

I get his point, but ugh. Can’t he think a little before he says stuff like this.

I expect Newt to be undisciplined and make over the top statements that will alienate himself from voters he will need to win the general.

But Romney keeps giving soundbytes to feed the rich out of touch narrative.

Second look at Santorum?

cd98 on February 1, 2012 at 10:17 AM

Romney “not concerned about the very poor

Montgomery Burns 2012!

V7_Sport on February 1, 2012 at 10:18 AM

I do not blame him. Rich people hate the poor. During my time in college the rich folks didn’t want to hang with us because we were from poor backgrounds. They despise the working poor and look down upon us for not being wealthy
liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

I suspect some “rich” person in college may have stooped to buy po-po pitiful you a beer if your personality and blindingly huge chip on your shoulder were not so repulsive.

viking01 on February 1, 2012 at 10:18 AM

Does it bother you at all that people think you’re a ridiculous troll? You’re like the kid making farting noises in the back of a school assembly. I have to believe you have it in you to do better than that.

Paul-Cincy on February 1, 2012 at 10:16 AM

not one bit. People call me a troll because they refuse to accept the truth or they are used to people agreeing with them.

liberal4life on February 1, 2012 at 10:18 AM

This just reaffirms that Romney’s plan is just to tinker with the system that we have, rather than making the reforms that we need. And even if defending the status quo, he does it in the most tone deaf way possible. And where is this federalist Romney that I’ve been hearing so much about when it comes to healthcare? He’s a federalist for healthcare, but nothing else?

besser tot als rot on February 1, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 6