Mitt Romney has finally won his base by simply standing by a statement under scrutiny (why do I have the urge to talk to Governor Romney as I would my children after giving them medication for an illness, with a “see, that wasn’t so bad now, was it?”).
Obama is criticizing Romney for his statements at a fundraiser where he admitted that he probably would not get the votes of the 47% of Americans who have become a victim class, dependent on Government for free stuff (paraphrasing). Obama turned down an invitation to meet with Netanyahu this week, so that he could be on the Letterman show and use that format to whack Romney on the issue.
Obama contends that Romney alienated almost half of the voters in the US, and that it means he won’t represent them if elected President.
Defenders of Romney are pointing to the fact that less than 50% of people shoulder all the burden for all of America, and all of the charity she does around the world.
This does not indicate that Romney will not represent all Americans as president, but rather, that he understands who will support him, and what their likely motivation may be. The fact of the matter is that if your government check/job/handout is paramount to you as you survey the political landscape, you probably will not vote for Romney. He spoke a simple truth. This is practical, honest, and frankly refreshing to hear from an American politician. Romney said his own statement “wasn’t elegant,” but it was honest and the Americans are starved for that sort of transparency in politics.
Michelle Obama’s outfit for the Democrat National convention cost around 9k dollars. Where is the media obsession and outrage over this? The people she claims to represent (the poor, the needy) could never spend that on an outfit. It comes across as arrogant for this administration to believe it can spend like this while the people it purports to champion suffer. Furthermore, where is the media in asking Obama to help his own brother who lives in Kenya in profound poverty, and makes less than $1 per month? Could the millionaire President not spare a little social change?
Americans are acutely aware of that as they spend their paychecks to fill their gas tanks, and spend more in taxes than they have in the history. This president has tripled the debt, excused an unprecedented unemployment high, and he has the unmitigated gall to suggest that Romney is arrogantly ignoring peoples’ needs?