Romney’s liberal message on poverty
In Reagan’s vision, conservatives should never accept a permanent underclass trapped in dependency and despair. But that is precisely what Romney described. Here is what Romney said: “We have a very ample safety net, and we can talk about whether it needs to be strengthened or whether there are holes in it. But we have food stamps, we have Medicaid, we have housing vouchers, we have programs to help the poor.” So Romney is fine with an entire class of Americans being permanently on food stamps, Medicaid, housing vouchers and other government welfare programs? His solution for our fellow citizens trapped in poverty and dependency is to find holes in the safety net and repair them?
That is not conservatism. That is liberalism. The left judges compassion by how much money we spend, which is why the liberal project is to strengthen the safety net and grow the nanny state. The conservative project is to help people escape the safety net. Conservatives seek to create an opportunity society where we can lift people out of lives of dependency. We are not okay with having millions of Americans trapped in poverty and living on the dole. We are not okay with multiple generations trapped in government welfare. We believe in a society where the poor have opportunities for advancement. We want them to have the education and skills they need to find good jobs, get off public assistance and to move up to the middle class and beyond — as far as their ambition and ability will take them.
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
Oh noes!
MITTBOTS! TO THE BARRICADES!
Dack Thrombosis on February 7, 2012 at 4:03 PM
Insert anything there, really.
lorien1973 on February 7, 2012 at 4:04 PM
It didn’t hurt him in Nevada and it’s not going to hurt him in Colorado, so opponents of Romney should stop espousing his minor gaffe.
The Nerve on February 7, 2012 at 4:04 PM
Anybody who’s surprised by this isn’t paying attention or more likely just doesn’t care because he’s not Obama.
yhxqqsn on February 7, 2012 at 4:09 PM
I’m surprised angyered hasn’t shown up yet to spew is usual anti-Romney venom. Aaah, but the day is still young.
jawkneemusic on February 7, 2012 at 4:16 PM
I am no fan of Romney’s, but I think it is unfair to claim that is what he meant. The point is we have a strong safety net in this country – it’s there, in place. Simply pointing that out is not saying you want to create dependency on it.
Reverse the argument. By arguing that we, as conservatives, want to help everyone overcome poverty and become successful, do we mean that we are arguing to get rid of all of the safety net (grant you, most conservatives would want to significantly reform the various entitlements, but I doubt many actually contemplate having absolutely no safety net)?
No. Saying that we want to create an environment where the economy roars and everyone profits does not ipso facto mean that we want to abolish the safety net altogether. Likewise, simply pointing out that we have a strong safety net in place does not mean one wants a permanent underclass of entitlement dependents.
Monkeytoe on February 7, 2012 at 4:18 PM
Ha.
rogerb on February 7, 2012 at 4:19 PM
Looks to me Romney is shamed of his wealth….
liberal4life on February 7, 2012 at 4:26 PM
As Ck said, “The real problem here is that it shows he doesn’t have fluency with conservative ideas.”
INC on February 7, 2012 at 4:29 PM
No, having spent his entire adult life outside of conservative circles—and having spent little time in the last few years reading conservative thinking—he’s flailing to figure out how to express conservative ideas.
INC on February 7, 2012 at 4:31 PM
Romney is a liberal. The sun rises in the east.
Not exactly bombshells.
Norwegian on February 7, 2012 at 4:33 PM
Looks to me Romney is shamed of his wealth….
liberal4life on February 7, 2012 at 4:26 PM
HumpBot Salvation on February 7, 2012 at 4:34 PM
It’s amazing to me that Mitt thought he could coast through this without doing any prep work at all. But then, during the Reagan years, he was running away from Reagan.
James Pethokoukis: Mitt Romney, meet Jack Kemp
Larry Kudlow: Message to Mitt: A rising tide lifts all boats
INC on February 7, 2012 at 4:36 PM
Does anybody expect us to be surprised at Romney liberal messages? He he has actually dropped all pretense and doesn’t even bother pandering to conservatives anymore. Just like McCain did in 2008 (at least he waited until he won the nomination). Conservatives have become irrelevant in national elections, they will just vote for whomever the GOP puts in front of them, like the majority of blacks will vote for any anyone the Dems put in front of them.
neuquenguy on February 7, 2012 at 4:37 PM
Romney should challenge Obama for the Democratic ticket.
Their policies have alot in common. Abortion, Mandates, Socialized healthcare, so many more.
portlandon on February 7, 2012 at 4:37 PM
Depressing, can’t believe we are here. Remember how pumped up we were at the opportunity this election would give us to finally demonstrate the superiority of conservatism over liberalism? We had the election served to us on silver platter and the best we can offer is a white Obama.
neuquenguy on February 7, 2012 at 4:44 PM
I agree. Romney merely pointed out that we have programs in place to help the poor. He said nothing to indicate a desire for the poor to be permanently dependent on these programs.
cam2 on February 7, 2012 at 4:51 PM
Yep.
Anybody worth a damn, didn’t run because they would have to run against Obama,the Media, and the entire GOP establishment. It’s suicide to start out a political war completely surrounded.
portlandon on February 7, 2012 at 4:53 PM
It is worse than that really. Mitt isn’t the white Obama. Obama has the ability to at least try to appear to connect with people. Mitt has no such connection. Take Mitt out of his comfort zone and he looks like he wants to be any place but where he is. Place poor and middle class people around Obama and he doesn’t look like a fish out of water. Place Mitt there and he looks like an arrogant lord looking down on the peasants. conservatism is not in this election. Our choice appears to be a socialist vs a liberal. can’t vote for either.
unseen on February 7, 2012 at 5:35 PM
You guys didn’t even read Thiessen’s piece, did you? Your agreement with Romney’s comments is exactly what Thiessen was decrying! We don’t need Conservatives saying we aren’t worried about the poor because there are safety nets to help them. The problem with that statement, as Thiessen so eloquently articulated, is that the safety nets don’t help the poor get out of poverty! The fact that Romney stated he doesn’t have a problem with these programs just confirmed that he’s a Progressive, because Conservatives do have a problem with them! I can’t believe so many Conservatives are falling for the supposed “electability” canard surrounding Romney. Obama will make mincemeat out of him in the general election. You watch. Romney doesn’t even have the cojones to call Obama a Marxist or even a socialist. He just says he’s “in over his head”. We will end up with McCain II in the general if we nominate Romney.
GeorgiaBuckeye on February 7, 2012 at 5:38 PM
On the other hand, if Mitt was running as a D, I would register as a D to vote for him. He’d look great in the other party and would help the country by pulling the Ds back from the socialist brink to their more traditional NE liberalism.
james23 on February 7, 2012 at 5:39 PM
The Obama photo team seems to be great at getting him doing just that.
Also with kids, aw……
libfreeordie on February 7, 2012 at 6:25 PM
yeap Obama will be going after the poor and the middle class this election. He will leave the rich and the upper middle class alone for Mitt and I hate to tell people this but there are many more the poor and middle class than the wealthy. This is Obama’s game plan, this is why the OWS movement was hatched by the dems. This is why the media has played up the OWS movement and attacked the TEA party. They want the middle class to vote D not R. With the TEA party the middle class would have voted R like they did in 2010. with Mitt and the country clubbers the middle class will be either voting D or sitting home either way Obama wins.
unseen on February 7, 2012 at 7:16 PM