Romney's way: Let middle class pay th...

Romney's way: Let middle class pay the rich's tab

There are 44 comments on the www.cnn.com story from Jun 19, 2012, titled Romney's way: Let middle class pay the rich's tab. In it, www.cnn.com reports that:

We all know this election is going to be about the economy. President Barack Obama knows it, Mitt Romney knows it and so do the media -- even though at times pundits pretend it's about much smaller and sillier topics.

The difference, as the president told the country last week, is that he is the only candidate in the race who truly understands that it's about a very specific part of our economy: the middle class.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.cnn.com.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Since: Mar 09

The Left Coast

#1 Jun 19, 2012
It is the economy. We need get spending under control. When Obama took office the national debt was $6trillion, today it's $15trillion. The Obama administration tried and couldn't get it under control. Time to try somebody else. If he can't do it, we'll fire him too.

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#2 Jun 19, 2012
I'm coming to the conclusion that it may not matter who wins the election. As Americans, we can't come to an agreement that our government, through the decades, has brought us to where we are now. We, as a people, don't have the insight to come together as a force to make changes for the good of us all.

The errors and mistakes caused by each and every administration has led us to this point - yet, instead of being angry at them all we pick and choose according to whether we prefer apples or oranges.

Will Romney make things better? Did Nixon make things better? Carter? Reagan? Any of them in living memory? There were people who thought Herbert Hoover was the greatest thing that ever happened...simply because he was a Republican. Just as there are people who rally for Obama just because he's a Democrat.

They all lie, they all cheat , they all scam, they all manipulate. And WE, the voting public, give them the ability to do these things because every couple of years we MUST choose leaders who take our country ever deeper into an abyss.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#3 Jun 19, 2012
RustyS wrote:
It is the economy. We need get spending under control. When Obama took office the national debt was $6trillion, today it's $15trillion. The Obama administration tried and couldn't get it under control. Time to try somebody else. If he can't do it, we'll fire him too.
No, Obama had to invest money in the economy to pay GW Bush's unpaid bills. He had to throw money into the economy to save American industry, and hold off the Greeat BUSH Depression. I know you don't want to admit that, but it is nonetheless true.

What has Obama "spent" on?
What, specifically has he done to waste money?

Health care program?
Mostly paid for by the industry.

Increasing border protection?
Well yes, you've got him there.

Cash for clunkers?
Yes, top pump money intio the economy because of Cheney-Bush's incompetant management.
Robert

Hollywood, FL

#4 Jun 19, 2012
Ha, no spin right mr bill, how about posting some news instead of a canned democratic article.

The author of that article is a democratic strategist, a manager in the Gore-Lieberman 2000 presidential campaign.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#5 Jun 19, 2012
PayThat CEO wrote:
I'm coming to the conclusion that it may not matter who wins the election. As Americans, we can't come to an agreement that our government, through the decades, has brought us to where we are now. We, as a people, don't have the insight to come together as a force to make changes for the good of us all.
The errors and mistakes caused by each and every administration has led us to this point - yet, instead of being angry at them all we pick and choose according to whether we prefer apples or oranges.
Will Romney make things better? Did Nixon make things better? Carter? Reagan? Any of them in living memory? There were people who thought Herbert Hoover was the greatest thing that ever happened...simply because he was a Republican. Just as there are people who rally for Obama just because he's a Democrat.
They all lie, they all cheat , they all scam, they all manipulate. And WE, the voting public, give them the ability to do these things because every couple of years we MUST choose leaders who take our country ever deeper into an abyss.
The American people are not pragmatic...they vote like fourth-graders at an amusement park; no thought, no memory, no historical context.

Most make up their mind in the last three weeks, and are more influenced by whatever crap is on the TV than what is in their own interest; they don't even understand their own interest; nor our national interest.

"who thinks what about the homosexuals, or the commies, or whatever the silly bugaboo is that seasson."

SURPRISE !

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#6 Jun 19, 2012
RustyS wrote:
It is the economy. We need get spending under control. When Obama took office the national debt was $6trillion, today it's $15trillion. The Obama administration tried and couldn't get it under control. Time to try somebody else. If he can't do it, we'll fire him too.
So every four years we keep firing someone? Just imagine where we'll be in another ten years.

Why do we vote for these people and then sit back and bitch and complain for 4 years? And then vote in another and sit back and bitch and complain for 4 years? Where has THAT gotten us?

Part of the problem is that we, as a people, don't even know what we want. What one president does it wrong, if another president does the same thing it's OK. We're wishy-washy and two-faced and we can't decide what's right and what's wrong and what's best for the common good of the people. We take sides and throw rocks and hate one another and nothing is ever accomplished.

As a nation, we've become a sad shell of our former self and the downhill slide began long ago. That deficit you speak of didn't get that way all because of Obama. And IF, by chance, Romney is elected and suddenly we find ourselves in economic heaven after 10+ years of struggle, I will be convinced that our country can all be manipulated by a higher power than a president.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#7 Jun 19, 2012
Robert wrote:
Ha, no spin right mr bill, how about posting some news instead of a canned democratic article.
The author of that article is a democratic strategist, a manager in the Gore-Lieberman 2000 presidential campaign.
You should learn to discern TRUTH from 'spin.'
Just above this article, I posted a pro-Romney article.

I do try to balance; sorry you can't see that.
And, isn't this aricle true, although you don't like to hear it?

Who will, in fact, pay of the national debt?
The poor? The Rich?
NO.

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#8 Jun 19, 2012
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
No, Obama had to invest money in the economy to pay GW Bush's unpaid bills. He had to throw money into the economy to save American industry, and hold off the Greeat BUSH Depression. I know you don't want to admit that, but it is nonetheless true.
What has Obama "spent" on?
What, specifically has he done to waste money?
Health care program?
Mostly paid for by the industry.
Increasing border protection?
Well yes, you've got him there.
Cash for clunkers?
Yes, top pump money intio the economy because of Cheney-Bush's incompetant management.
You're right. He had to spend in order to get the economy moving along again. People said the same thing about FDR. They said he was spending money during a time when the country couldn't afford it. But people went back to work because of that money. Those who opposed were simply those who WEREN'T making money from his projects ---- Wall Street.

We DO see signs of life back in our economy. It's not the insane economy we saw 6 or 7 years ago when the building industry was crazy; but that was a bubble. It couldn't continue. Now we're back to reality and a lot of people don't like that. We have to fix was was broke in 2008 and that's going to take a long time. If Romney can do it, more power to him, but I truly believe he will be in a mad rush to prove himself and things will only end up going backward instead of forward.
Robert

Hollywood, FL

#9 Jun 19, 2012
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
You should learn to discern TRUTH from 'spin.'
Just above this article, I posted a pro-Romney article.
I do try to balance; sorry you can't see that.
And, isn't this aricle true, although you don't like to hear it?
Who will, in fact, pay of the national debt?
The poor? The Rich?
NO.
Ii am not in favor of pro romney articles either, just news
Robert

Hollywood, FL

#10 Jun 19, 2012
PayThat CEO wrote:
<quoted text>
You're right. He had to spend in order to get the economy moving along again. People said the same thing about FDR. They said he was spending money during a time when the country couldn't afford it. But people went back to work because of that money. Those who opposed were simply those who WEREN'T making money from his projects ---- Wall Street.
We DO see signs of life back in our economy. It's not the insane economy we saw 6 or 7 years ago when the building industry was crazy; but that was a bubble. It couldn't continue. Now we're back to reality and a lot of people don't like that. We have to fix was was broke in 2008 and that's going to take a long time. If Romney can do it, more power to him, but I truly believe he will be in a mad rush to prove himself and things will only end up going backward instead of forward.
Speak for yourself I vote libertarian, people say I throw my vote away and it is my fault Obama is in.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#11 Jun 19, 2012
PayThat CEO wrote:
<quoted text>
So every four years we keep firing someone? Just imagine where we'll be in another ten years.
Why do we vote for these people and then sit back and bitch and complain for 4 years? And then vote in another and sit back and bitch and complain for 4 years? Where has THAT gotten us?
Part of the problem is that we, as a people, don't even know what we want. What one president does it wrong, if another president does the same thing it's OK. We're wishy-washy and two-faced and we can't decide what's right and what's wrong and what's best for the common good of the people. We take sides and throw rocks and hate one another and nothing is ever accomplished.
As a nation, we've become a sad shell of our former self and the downhill slide began long ago. That deficit you speak of didn't get that way all because of Obama. And IF, by chance, Romney is elected and suddenly we find ourselves in economic heaven after 10+ years of struggle, I will be convinced that our country can all be manipulated by a higher power than a president.
In a way,. Rusty is right.

We should cut spending.

But the place to start is where people like Rusty will whine the most....In those states that take far more than they give to the US Treasury: THE US WELFARE SUCKER STATES...

Here is a listy of states that should bear all the brunt of cost-cutting by the Federal government.
The dollar amount is the amount each state, IN MILLIONS, sucks from the Federal Treasury.

This is where the TAX money goes, this is where we must CUT SPENDING ---to these states.

Read this report, find your state. If it appears below in the list, YOU ARE A WELFARE SUCKER.

Virginia $34,912
Montana $2,586
Louisiana 19,065
Iowa 2,515
Maryland 17,542
Idaho 1,870
Alabama 17,386
Texas 1,751
Mississippi 13,747
Utah 1,689
Missouri 13,102
Nebraska 1,524
Kentucky 12,650
Wyoming 573
Tennessee 12,416
Vermont 560
Pennsylvania 11,563
Rhode Island 454
New Mexico 10,713
So. Carolina 9,333
Arizona. 8,651
Oklahoma 8,065
Ohio 7,577
W. Virginia 7,272
No. Carolina 6,615
Arkansas 6,461
Alaska 4,400
Indiana 4,266
Hawaii 4,180
Georgia 3,894
Maine 3,637
Kansas 3,058
No. Dakota 2,779
So. Dakota 2,641


http://martincantor.com/files/FederalbudgetAn...

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#12 Jun 19, 2012
Robert wrote:
<quoted text>
Ii am not in favor of pro romney articles either, just news
Sometimess there is useful or importat news or information in one. See the generally pro-Romney article about him using the 'road' to vet his VP choices.
Makes sense

Dearborn, MI

#13 Jun 19, 2012
What's wrong with that? It's payback for all the generational robbing that Teddy Roosevelt started 100 years ago. We don't need or want a Middle Class. Thank you very much! We need cheap labor and a return to aristocracy, the landed and the serfs.

We HATE the Middle Class. At least the poor know their place. The Middle Class is uppity and arrogant. The Elite will rule AGAIN!
Makes sense

Dearborn, MI

#15 Jun 19, 2012
The Middle Class will just continue to die away with the Baby Boomers that squandered the savings of their parents on extravagant luxuries like food, flat screen tvs, entertainment subscriptions, and internet service. Now you dumb MF's have NOTHING to show for your lives. You're living paycheck to paycheck expecting Social Security and Medicare to be there for you one day. LOL

It's your own fault, you lazyasses. You will NEVER be part of the American ELITE. You'll NEVER have the money to match ours.

Thanks for your fees and your subscriptions, but you're on your own, suckers.

Game on! YOU lose!
River Veteran

Roswell, GA

#16 Jun 19, 2012
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
No, Obama had to invest money in the economy to pay GW Bush's unpaid bills. He had to throw money into the economy to save American industry, and hold off the Greeat BUSH Depression. I know you don't want to admit that, but it is nonetheless true.
What has Obama "spent" on?
What, specifically has he done to waste money?
Health care program?
Mostly paid for by the industry.
Increasing border protection?
Well yes, you've got him there.
Cash for clunkers?
Yes, top pump money intio the economy because of Cheney-Bush's incompetant management.


Uuummmm Dems controlled the House and Senate during your mythological "Bush Depression"... Nice Try on the BS but you still LOSE!

What specifically has he done wasted money on????? REALLY??????
Do you want a list of all the 'green' companies that have FAILED and gone into bankruptcy????? come on....Do you want a list?????

How about a list of the 'shovel ready jobs' that he KNEW 'weren't shovel ready', laughed about not being shovel ready...you know...the BILLIONS that were wasted on these not-so shovel ready jobs!

The health care bill (scam) is NOT mostly paid for by the 'industry'. If that was the case, why has my insurance cost gone up by almost 75% in anticipation of this unconstitutional power grap!

You believed the DemocRAT lies...typical of a gullable liberal.

You believed the DemocRAT lies regarding the $900BILLION cost of the affordable (hardly) care act....When ACA was rammed into law, in the spring of 2010, CBO made official estimates of how much the law would cost(going off misleading numbers from this administration), how many people would get insurance as a result, and so on. It updated that estimate one year later and has, now, updated it one more time...Now the CBO estimates the gross cost will be $1.496 trillion
Nice try again....you still lose!
rider

Ishpeming, MI

#17 Jun 19, 2012
Why you are a slave. Rothschild's own you! End The FED!- YouTube
Oct 22, 2008 ... If you believe you are free, then why do you pay taxes to a private institution.

- 154k -
River Veteran

Roswell, GA

#18 Jun 19, 2012
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
In a way,. Rusty is right.
We should cut spending.
But the place to start is where people like Rusty will whine the most....In those states that take far more than they give to the US Treasury: THE US WELFARE SUCKER STATES...
Here is a listy of states that should bear all the brunt of cost-cutting by the Federal government.
The dollar amount is the amount each state, IN MILLIONS, sucks from the Federal Treasury.
This is where the TAX money goes, this is where we must CUT SPENDING ---to these states.
Read this report, find your state. If it appears below in the list, YOU ARE A WELFARE SUCKER.
Virginia $34,912
Montana $2,586
Louisiana 19,065
Iowa 2,515
Maryland 17,542
Idaho 1,870
Alabama 17,386
Texas 1,751
Mississippi 13,747
Utah 1,689
Missouri 13,102
Nebraska 1,524
Kentucky 12,650
Wyoming 573
Tennessee 12,416
Vermont 560
Pennsylvania 11,563
Rhode Island 454
New Mexico 10,713
So. Carolina 9,333
Arizona. 8,651
Oklahoma 8,065
Ohio 7,577
W. Virginia 7,272
No. Carolina 6,615
Arkansas 6,461
Alaska 4,400
Indiana 4,266
Hawaii 4,180
Georgia 3,894
Maine 3,637
Kansas 3,058
No. Dakota 2,779
So. Dakota 2,641
http://martincantor.com/files/FederalbudgetAn...
This is one post that I actually agree with you on! cut spending is one thing but it might actually hurt someone that needs help in regards to welfare. I personally think we should go after fraud in these areas. To give you an example..... CBO estimates about $100Billion is wasted on medicare/medicaid in regards to FRAUD. We only have about 200 fed employees looking into fraud payments through these two entities. Chase bank has over 1,600 agents that looking credit card fraud..... we need 1,600 agents looking into govt waste and fraud in my opinion. We could save about $100billion a year if we looked into fraud at the military level as well. Stop spending..prosecute those defrauding out govt, etc....

Since: Sep 08

Placitas, NM

#20 Jun 19, 2012
River Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Uuummmm Dems controlled the House and Senate during your mythological "Bush Depression"... Nice Try on the BS but you still LOSE!......!
Anyone who makes such a a stupid statement has no validity at all.
The rest of their rambling crap can just be disregarded out of hand as babble from a brainwashed misinformed fool. The Repukes controlled both houses of congress for 14 straight years, including 6 with Dubya in the WH. From 2001 to 2007 Dubya's economic performance was the WORST since WWII!

"The competition for slowest growth is not even close, either. Growth from 2001 to 2007 averaged 2.39 percent a year (and growth from 2001 through the third quarter of 2010 averaged 1.66 percent). The decade with the second-worst showing for growth was 1971 to 1980 — the dreaded 1970s — but it still had 3.21 percent average growth.
The picture does not change if you instead look at five-year periods. Here’s a chart ranking five-year periods over the past 50 years, in descending order of average annual growth:
DAVID LEONHARDT http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/18/... Bureau of Economic Analysis, via Haver Analytics

I mean this as a serious question, not a rhetorical one: Given this history, why should we believe that the Bush tax cuts were pro-growth?

Is there good evidence the tax cuts persuaded more people to join the work force (because they would be able to keep more of their income)? Not really. The labor-force participation rate fell in the years after 2001 and has never again approached its record in the year 2000.

Is there evidence that the tax cuts led to a lot of entrepreneurship and innovation? Again, no. The rate at which start-up businesses created jobs fell during the past decade.

The theory for why tax cuts should create growth and jobs is a strong one. When people are allowed to keep more of each dollar they earn, they are likely to work longer and harder. The uncertainty is the magnitude of this effect. With everything else that’s happening in a $15 trillion economy, how large of an effect on growth do tax cuts have?

Every available piece of evidence seems to suggest that the Bush tax cuts did little to lift growth. I have yet to hear a good argument to the contrary, but I’d be fascinated to see another blogger or an economist take a crack at it." DAVID LEONHARDT http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/18/...
rider

Ishpeming, MI

#21 Jun 19, 2012
River Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
This is one post that I actually agree with you on! cut spending is one thing but it might actually hurt someone that needs help in regards to welfare. I personally think we should go after fraud in these areas. To give you an example..... CBO estimates about $100Billion is wasted on medicare/medicaid in regards to FRAUD. We only have about 200 fed employees looking into fraud payments through these two entities. Chase bank has over 1,600 agents that looking credit card fraud..... we need 1,600 agents looking into govt waste and fraud in my opinion. We could save about $100billion a year if we looked into fraud at the military level as well. Stop spending..prosecute those defrauding out govt, etc....
Why you are a slave. Rothschild's own you! End The FED!- YouTube
Oct 22, 2008 ... If you believe you are free, then why do you pay taxes to a private institution.

- 154k -
xnutmegger

Phoenix, AZ

#22 Jun 19, 2012
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
In a way,. Rusty is right.
We should cut spending.
But the place to start is where people like Rusty will whine the most....In those states that take far more than they give to the US Treasury: THE US WELFARE SUCKER STATES...
Here is a listy of states that should bear all the brunt of cost-cutting by the Federal government.
The dollar amount is the amount each state, IN MILLIONS, sucks from the Federal Treasury.
This is where the TAX money goes, this is where we must CUT SPENDING ---to these states.
Read this report, find your state. If it appears below in the list, YOU ARE A WELFARE SUCKER.
Virginia $34,912
Montana $2,586
Louisiana 19,065
Iowa 2,515
Maryland 17,542
Idaho 1,870
Alabama 17,386
Texas 1,751
Mississippi 13,747
Utah 1,689
Missouri 13,102
Nebraska 1,524
Kentucky 12,650
Wyoming 573
Tennessee 12,416
Vermont 560
Pennsylvania 11,563
Rhode Island 454
New Mexico 10,713
So. Carolina 9,333
Arizona. 8,651
Oklahoma 8,065
Ohio 7,577
W. Virginia 7,272
No. Carolina 6,615
Arkansas 6,461
Alaska 4,400
Indiana 4,266
Hawaii 4,180
Georgia 3,894
Maine 3,637
Kansas 3,058
No. Dakota 2,779
So. Dakota 2,641
http://martincantor.com/files/FederalbudgetAn...
Your posted list is a Strawman or Red Herring at best.

Virginia and Maryland are high because of Fed. gov't jobs not food stamps.It's no secret that under Obama homes near D.C. skyrocketed in price while they tanked in the rest of the country.

As to states like New Mexico and Arizona the BIA spends billions on the Indian Reservations and the Fed land holdings are enormous.
New Mexico has Los Alamos Labs , Sandia Labs , White Sands plus 2 -3 AF bases. While Native Americans tribes make up a significant portion of the titles land.

Arizona has 87% of it's land owned by gov'ts from vast reservations to national forests . If the tax base is 13% of it's land area it's no wonder fed money inflows exceed outflows.

If you LEFTIES were serious about which way the money flows you would take a serious look at increasing leasing fed lands to private businesses to generate royalties and leasing fees.
Just allowing rational harvesting of timber in National Forests would generate income for the Fed Treasury.

The Spotted Owl hoax cost 30,000 private sector jobs . The Guppy protection act cost 50,000 private sector agriculture jobs in Central California among mainly Latino-Americans that you LEFTIES claim you look out for.

BTW , why is the Feds keep adding to the national real estate holdings from thousands of empty bldgs that the GSA controls to miilions of raw acreage across the country ?
Could it be just plain old Empire Building ?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Georgetown University Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Poll: US views of Francis dim; a plunge in appr... Jul 23 QUITTNER Jul 23 2015 5
News Cartersville's first pediatrician reflects on 3... Jul 13 babies 4
News Jeb Bush's brotherly bind May '15 Sterkfontein Swar... 1
News Obama set to address roots of poverty May '15 Butters 58
News Gadhafi: U.S. should seek peace with bin Laden (Feb '09) May '15 swedenforever 47
FORMER YUGOSLAVS==>>ARE NOT MACEDONlANS May '15 AMERICAN RUFFIANS 1
News Obama: 'Kids Start Going to Private Schools...P... May '15 Tazo 4
More from around the web