Let's ignore the small stuff and go right to the campaign material.
Romney suggested that 47% of the population is "dependent". Obama stated that "You didn't build that."
Hmmmmm. For this analysis, we won't even bother with the 'qualifying' remarks made hastily by each campaign's spinner(s). We don't have to.
According to this pundit, Romney had pulled out the pre-1965 Republican line: bashing welfare recipients. Unfortunately for him, both the WSJ and National Review had changed that line, for very good reason: it includes SocSec and Medicare recipients, along with genuinely disabled/incapable folks. Not only do SocSec/Medicare recipients think--rightfully--that they earned their benefits; many of them are working in addition to getting the bennies. Unemployment compensation is what it is; not many of the recipients are happy about getting it, and it's usually temporary.
(I recognize, as does anyone with common sense, that there are abusers in all sorts of programs. We can argue politely about degree, but not substance.)
Romney's remark was pretty damn dumb. He may call it "inarticulate," or "inartful," or "not well-phrased." It's still pretty damn dumb.
Obama's remark is different in kind. He placed Government before individual initiative; it is his belief that Gummint is the necessary pre-requisite to 'success,' whether that Gummint built a road, or bridge, or schoolhouse...whatever. It was not only damn dumb, it was wrong. Taxes, drawn from individuals with (or without) individual initiative, are prior to Government, or at least are the sine qua non thereof.
Both of these turkeys managed to insult a bunch of Americans. But only Obama was wholly wrong on the premise. Romney was partly wrong.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
We all know that the president doesn't speak in sound bites as Republicans want people to believe. Your characterization of Obama's comments is inaccurate. He did not place Government before individual initiative.
On the other hand, Romney's words were not cut off in mid-paragraph. the entire context of his statement was presented for all to see.
My characterization is dead-on.
Listen to the windbag's entire 3 grafs--nothing modifies his error.
Post a Comment