Romney: Obama voters dependent on government, entitled, don't pay taxes

[Anonymous]

Everyone knows this is true he just stayed stated the obvious. I don't know why people are shocked. Obama voters, are subsidized on welfare , or work government jobs or government related, etc...

They are either too lazy or stupid to fend for themselves.

Granted a very small amount maybe disabled but the system would take care of them. We don't need to create policies that stifle prosperity to make the exception the rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It funny how a person who wants to be President thinks American citizens don't have a right to food. I guess that 47% should just eat cake.

Food, shelter and health care.

Who are the people this man is talking about. He says that people living or surviving off the government dime consider themselves victims. Is he talking about defense contractors? Kids applying for school loans and grants to become more educated and employable? Teachers educating the next generation? Senior citizens on SS and medicare? Military personnel subsidizing their government income with food stamps? The firefighters in Colorado risking their lives to save ultra-conservative Michelle Malkin's home from burning? The same firefighters with no health insurance. The mother who wants to go to work, but childcare would eat up any earnings, so she subsist on government TANF? The scientist at NIH working to find a cure for MS and CP? Who is Mitt aka Williard talking about? He says these people consider themselves victims and he is not going to worry about him.

And this is what so many want in their president. God help the U.S.

[Anonymous]

Obama demonizes the prosperous and join creators, romney calls out the stupid obama voters.

It will be smart and prosperous vs the stupid. I hope the the stupid loses but I fear the majority is now stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone knows this is true he just stayed stated the obvious. I don't know why people are shocked. Obama voters, are subsidized on welfare , or work government jobs or government related, etc...

They are either too lazy or stupid to fend for themselves.

Granted a very small amount maybe disabled but the system would take care of them. We don't need to create policies that stifle prosperity to make the exception the rule.

Democrats are also educated, employed, of many different races - and make plenty of money.


- Me and my six figures, fending for myself, paying a ton in taxes - and voting for Obama

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone knows this is true he just stayed stated the obvious. I don't know why people are shocked. Obama voters, are subsidized on welfare , or work government jobs or government related, etc...

They are either too lazy or stupid to fend for themselves.

Granted a very small amount maybe disabled but the system would take care of them. We don't need to create policies that stifle prosperity to make the exception the rule.

Speak for yourself. We are Obama voters who makes a lot of money, pay a lot of tax, and send our kids to private schools.

[Anonymous]

Is anyone else's back sore?
Because I'm one of the 53% and I feel like I've been giving piggy back rides for years.

[Anonymous]

I used to live in the South. The republic voters I knew lived in trailers, had the lowest paying jobs on campus, could hardly scrape by without family assistance. I always wondered why they would vote against their own interests.

[Anonymous]

republican voters

[Anonymous]

The comments on Washington Post are growing so fast, I can not even read them lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Obama demonizes the prosperous and join creators, romney calls out the stupid obama voters.

It will be smart and prosperous vs the stupid. I hope the the stupid loses but I fear the majority is now stupid.

In my experience, every rich person is not smart and every poor person is not stupid. There are rich people who actually didn't make the money, they inheritied it and pay people to take care of it. They may be prosperous, but that does not mean they are smart. There are smart people who don't get a chance to be prosperous because they may lack the opprotunity to go to school.

You should also keep in mind that there is a long list of people who were prosperous only to lose it all. If that were to happen to you or a member of your family, what should happen to them?

Even as a matter of your own self interest, isn't it better for the government to help pay for school so that there will be people to take care of you as you grow old; so that people don't have so little and are so desperate that they rob you; so that government workers earn a fair wage so that they don't resort to corruption?

Do you think the late 1800's was a great time to live? Because that is where we are headed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I used to live in the South. The republic voters I knew lived in trailers, had the lowest paying jobs on campus, could hardly scrape by without family assistance. I always wondered why they would vote against their own interests.

It is highly likely that they will not even realize that Romney is talking about them. I can see them saying "Yeah Romney, tell it like it is!" They probably imagine these people are all black and live in the city. They on the other hand are going through "tough times" after the plant closed five years ago. "Tough times" is completely different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Republican candidate, whose name is Mitt (not Mittens; gotta loved uninformed voters!), is right in his statement.

It's about time someone brought it up. It's only sad that he didn't say it for everyone to hear. The media will hound on him for this instead of correctly taking the current president to task for letting the Libyan situation take a backseat to his shameless Vegas trip, campaign begging, and so on.

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012

Uninformed? I do not think that word means what you think it means.

What it means is that supposed adults keep using a childish name to refer to him, thinking they are just hilarious.
Meanwhile, whenever anyone refers to the president as "Barack Hussein Obama" -- which IS his name -- they are clearly racists and Islamaphobes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Democrats are also educated, employed, of many different races - and make plenty of money.

Any reason why heavily-Democratic cities are cesspools of gangs, violence, poverty, disease?

[Freeman]

Anonymous wrote:What it means is that supposed adults keep using a childish name to refer to him, thinking they are just hilarious.
Meanwhile, whenever anyone refers to the president as "Barack Hussein Obama" -- which IS his name -- they are clearly racists and Islamaphobes.

Oddly enough, I never considered anyone calling the president "Barack Hussein Obama" racist or an Islamaphobe.(Is that even a word?) The only objections I've seen are when the name is used to imply that he is a Muslim, or to associate him with Islam in some way. I suppose you also criticized all the conservatives that kept calling Obama the "Messiah" during the 2008 race as well? Or is it only bad when a nickname is being used on your candidate?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Democrats are also educated, employed, of many different races - and make plenty of money.

Any reason why heavily-Democratic cities are cesspools of gangs, violence, poverty, disease?

Are you aware of the social problems that are rampant in heavily-Republican rural areas? There are deep historical reasons for the problems in both areas. Attempting to link them to political parties is pretty lame.