Monday, David Corn of Mother Jones fame, released a video, or rather, a group of videos, of Mitt Romney at a May 17, 2012 "campaign fundraiser" (asking for a hand-out), held in Boca Raton, FL, at the home of private equity manager and apparent Nero wanna-be, Marc Leder. The complete videos were submitted to Corn (after a few sections had been released on YouTube) and verified as authentic:
Among other statements, Mitt chose this opportunity to expound on his belief that 47% of the people in this nation believe they are "victims."
He went on to state that the 47%, nearly 1/2 of the country, don't pay income taxes (in any form) but are fully dependent on the government for their existence:
There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what…These are people who pay no income tax.
He compounded the problem Tuesday evening in a statement before another fund-raiser in Costa Mesa, CA:
"It's not elegantly stated, let me put it that way. I was speaking off the cuff in response to a question. And I'm sure I could state it more clearly in a more effective way than I did in a setting like that," Romney said. "Of course I want to help all Americans. All Americans have a bright and prosperous future."
Let us fact check the statement shall we?
Mitt takes that 47% from a spin on the facts released last July by the Tax Policy Center (I am quite certain he hasn't bothered to fact check it himself)...
The actual statement concerns those households that paid no Federal Income Tax in 2011. That number was 46.4% (leave it to Romney to push even 4/10 of a percent up to 47% instead of down to 46%) as shown below.
The pie chart below is a breakdown of that group according to the reasons for that non-payment of income taxes - they had no liability for Federal Income Tax....
As for a breakdown of the larger groups within the 47%:
44% of the 46.4% are elderly, retired and off the rolls and many of those are Romney voters (oops, Mitt, you just pissed off your base)
30.4% of the 46.4% are those receiving credits for children as well as the "working poor" (Mitt, are you proposing to remove those credits for families working hard to exist? Or raising the tax liability on those who can barely survive on what little they make in jobs that pay too little? I have to wonder just how many are employed by companies held or once held by BAIN)
We won't go into the fact that a few of these "non-paying" Americans are actually part of the top 1% who use the systems in place to avoid paying income tax and many don't pay much in payroll taxes either when income comes from dividends, and investments or when they hit that $110,100 cut off on Social Security investment.
NOW, let's get to the REST of the facts that Mitt missed so glaringly in his willful ignorance:
Nearly Two-Thirds of Households That Paid No Income Tax Paid Payroll Taxes
Who Paid Neither Income Nor Payroll Taxes?
More than half are elderly
Over one-third are nonelderly with income under $20,000
Only about 1 in 20 is nonelderly with income over $20,000
As for the rest of the American people - that "53%" or those whom he calls the few "independents" who believe in being "responsible" and the rest of the people who would "vote for him" - they "must" believe exactly as he believes; they must be all believers in "personal responsibility" and not "victims". They must believe in the vision of America as promoted by Mitt Romney. Of course, it is all or nothing.
SO, why is this important?
Mitt doesn't see that he is defending the indefensible. He makes a gross generalization about the American people that smacks of his own elitism and proves, once again, that he has no respect for or comprehension of life in America.
From comments bordering incomprehensible....
......to just plain tone deaf, Mitt Romney is out of touch, has no understanding that he is out of touch, and , frankly, doesn't appear to care..
It is not just the statements that are so jarring, it is the manner in which they are stated.
For Mitt, "out of touch" seems to be just fine. Afterall, why would he want to be "in touch" with those for whom he finds so "distasteful;" so "unclean;" so "irresponsible"?
The attitude is echoed in his response to questions and criticism arising from the David Corn/ "Mother Hones" video release just like they were echoed in statements made about "corporate personhood" last August.
"...Romney explained that one way to fulfill promises on entitlement programs is to “raise taxes on people,” but before he could articulate his position on not raising taxes, someone interrupted. “Corporations!” a protester shouted, apparently urging Romney to raise taxes on corporations that have benefited from loopholes in the tax code. “Corporations!” “Corporations are people, my friend,” Romney said. Some people in the front of the audience shouted, “No, they’re not!” “Of course they are,” Romney said. “Everything corporations earn ultimately goes to people. Where do you think it goes?”..."
Mitt's ignorance of America repeats last week, in an interview with George Stephenapolous of ABC, as they discussed his "taxpolicy", Romney was asked, "Is $100,000 middle income?" His response, "No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less"
OK, Mitt...Middle Income :
Another picture for you:
The chart not only dispels the raving lunacy of Mitt on "income" ranges, but also shows the growing disparity between income groups. That disparity starts on a cancerous growth starting in the mid-1980's.
Hmmm...What happened in the mid-1980's to create such a rapid growth among the top tiers while everyone mid-range and below stays about the same? What could POSSIBLY change to create such disparity?
The answer is found in Ronald Reagan and the installation of the neo-liberal reforms from "trickle down" to globalization and de-regulation. That "Ghost" of Ronald Reagan is still held as the God of the Republican Party. The Ghost sold in full falsehood with feigned pomp and imagined glory - sold as the Titan who would smite unions with a single blow, who took down Communism with the blink of an eye; who leaps tall buildings in a single bound..
Behind that falsehood hides the vision of unfettered and unchecked growth of the top 1% - No controls, no regulation, and full protection of that 1% by a government willing to allow corporations to do whatever they may want and a government willing to protect that corporate behavior through everything at their disposal eventually to include military, CIA, Congress and now the SCOTUS.
The Corporate Nanny State.
From that vision grew a priesthood - a full generation of initiates culled from the youth of that 1%; raised on the vision that the REAL people of the nation are Corporations and those who own them. Anyone else either joins the order or isn't worthy of consideration.
After 3 decades, we find that priesthood perpetuating the Myth of Reagan and the cancer that springs forth - a false paradigm developed in order to protect it all.
And the basis promoted behind that false paradigm is greed - institutionalized and made business and the business of greed is good....
Greed - Held sacrosanct and protected with blind fealty of Wall Street and those making billions from suckling at it's engorged tit.
And the leader of that army of the Priesthood shrieking in defense of wanton and unfettered capitalism, promoted and protected by government, allowed to be irresponsible and corrupt?
One Mitt Romney - Bishop and Defender of the Corporate Nanny State
Crosspost from FreakOutNation
Crosspost from FreakOutNation