Oh yeah? Well, Mitt Romney hates poor people.

 

A self inflicted wound.
“I don’t know what I’m going to do,” Rebecca sobbed after seeing her first 2013 paycheck. “I didn’t have an extra penny each payday and with the higher taxes now I can’t make ends meet.”
Rebecca voted for Obama and still has an Obama/Biden sticker on her car’s bumper.

 

I’m (sincerely) trying to muster up some sympathy.

 

Thanks to Jim Cobabe for bringing this to my attention.

 

 

  • Elizabeth Watkins

    Under the current administration, not only do we get to watch the nation turn into a vast Chicago slum, but we get to fund the “change.”

  • Lynn

    Obama voters are like Christmas lights. They are typically not all that bright and half of them don’t work and when they do, it’s only once a year.

  • Ryan

    Apparently the woman pictured above is a Filipino worker that fled Syrian violence. (source: http://www.salon.com/2012/09/12/filipinos_flee_war_in_syria_with_tales_of_horror/)

    I tried to track down where the accompanying quote from “Rebecca” originated, but had no luck. It seems suspect.

    • danpeterson

      Dang.

      Still, I know people who resent Obamacare, complain about our deficit, are irritated by government intrusion into their lives, etc., and yet voted for Barack Obama.

      So I suppose one could say that, while the specific photo isn’t true, it still remains True.

      • mikey

        Technical truth, or being in the spirit of the truth – ie, how is your message displayed when a picture is misappropriated and a comment is fabricated?
        Perhaps, as has been said before, “some things that are true just aren’t very useful”.

        • danpeterson

          And perhaps, motivated by a theologically-motivated personal hostility to me, you’re attempting to drag your hackneyed anti-Mormon talking point into a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with Mormonism. (That would be a first!)

          I’ve already acknowledged the error (which isn’t mine) and explained my attitude toward it. I prefer strict accuracy, but — apparently unlike my critics — sometimes fall short of it.

          Whether or not this particular photograph-with-caption is accurate, though, is of less importance than the fact that many Americans voted for someone who is determined to enact policies that many of them will regret, and that some, incredibly, were already regretting even as they voted for him. (I’ve met them. As I said.)

          • mikey

            Dan, I’ve never met you in person, so I don’t have any hostility to you, and am a card-carrying LDS. Assumptions won’t serve you well here.
            Nevertheless, the point I’m making is valid. The pic and text are assembled to make a point, but are done so in a way to convey authority of authenticity. Valid points don’t need such constructs.

          • danpeterson

            That’s true. And you should take your point up with the person who put the photo with the caption. ‘Twasn’t I.

            And if you’re active LDS, why do you criticize me on a thread that has nothing to do with Mormonism by appropriating a quote that is popularly abused, in much the way you abuse it here, in order to mock the president of the Council of the Twelve?

          • Ed Ludeman
  • mikey

    We all believe in educating ourselves, correct? At least more so than others that we might be denigrating in a backhanded sort of way… ; ) …so it serves readers well to read the following article:
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2013/01/14/dear-america-your-higher-payroll-taxes-are-not-the-result-of-a-tax-increase/
    Note that the payroll tax holiday was constructed to have a time limit and to end when it did – and that both Obama and Romney intended to let it expire.

  • mikey

    Dan – words are words, and not the exclusive property of any setting or person. The phrasing that I used is quite appropriate to the task, which addressed the image and text – not you personally. But you have free will to assume that disagreement with your words or what you choose to display is a ‘personal attack’, or not, if you feel that it best serves the spirit of debate.

    • danpeterson

      The “card-carrying Mormon” thing is often a disingenuous smokescreen, and, yes, I do suspect that your use of a venerable anti-Packer technique revealed your true colors.

      I’ve never met you, either, but you’ve given me sufficient reason to doubt you.

      • mikey

        OK, doubt away. In the meantime, I believe that my analysis is still accurate. At least, you haven’t given me much of a reason to think otherwise, as you’ve been spending your efforts trying to delegitimize me as opposed to examining the point.
        Did you read the linked article? It also deflates the intent of the caption above and the title of your post, but you’ll have to take that up with that author separately.

  • Grundelwalken

    Despite the obvious (at least so stated) fact that the picture and photo are not completely reliable, I can tell you that I know someone who has echoed a very similar statement since the first pay period of 2013. So it never occurred to me that the quote was inappropriate. And frankly, I didn’t really think the picture and quote went together — I assumed someone was just expressing a thought through metaphoric image. MW

  • kap

    I’m confused, are there or are their not Obama voters who voted for him under the assumption their taxes would not increase?

    Did Obama promise that taxes would only go up on those making X and above?

    The fabricated is just strange and I don’t know why people do things like that. But if I nod my head when someone explains a religious experience and ends it by saying, “I know God lives” and I say, I agree, that does not make my agreement or belief a fraud when/if that person latter on says they invented the entire experience.

    The story in question is used as one data point in a widely reported body of evidence at Obama voters expressing dismay.

    Romeny was more than willing to discuss what his tax proposals were, President Obama was more than willing to discuss who he would tax and who he wouldn’t tax. That’s why so many people are surprised — Obama talked so much about taxing others.

    Blaiming this on an expiration doesn’t change the fact that Obama is a poor leader.

    Disagree? What kind of leader just let’s everyone’s taxes increase by 2% and doesn’t say anything before or afterwards? A poor one, afraid to tell the truth to the voters. What America needs is leadership, not a politician. Romney’s life proves two things — he’s a mid-grade politician and a good leader. Obama is an excellent politician and a terrible leader.

    • mikey

      kap – You wrote, “What kind of leader just let’s everyone’s taxes increase by 2% and doesn’t say anything before or afterwards?”
      In fact, both candidates were plain in their intent to let this temporary cut expire. And in fact, the temporary cut was written from the start with that sunset provision. Neither fact has anything to do with Obama’s ‘leadership’ and everything to do with acknowledging facts that are out in the open, available to anyone that cares to acknowledge them.
      I must confess that I haven’t heard the same ‘widely reported body of evidence at Obama voters expressing dismay’ at the idea that the temporary cut would expire; perhaps I’m not tuning in to the right echo chambers. It’s interesting that much hay is also being made of it in the meantime by those that would not/did not vote for Obama… although the end result of this tax holiday fading away would still have been realized in the same fashion under a Romney presidency, if we are to believe Romney’s own words. To be fair, he waffled at the close of the campaign on whether or not he’d make good on that decision, but his stated policy throughout the majority of the campaign was that it should not be extended.

      • Ed Ludeman

        There were more than 2 candidates. :)

      • kap

        Boy, that’s really a stretch.
        Here is the truth. America spends too much and taxes too little (for it’s level of spending). This is true across the board, not just for the rich.

        If we want to continue to spend as much as we are, even grow the programs we have, as the President desires. Then we need even more revenue, and it must come from the majority of income earners/spenders.

        A real leader would acknowledge this and make the case. A politician will try to shuffle the pieces around on the game board long enough to stay in power and do the things they want to.

        Obama is not making the case other than making the case that “rich” people ought to pay more. Whether or not that’s true, it won’t pay for what he’s proposing. In a few years, it won’t even be enough to pay the interest on what we spend years ago.

        • mikey

          kap – I’m not here to argue or promote a particular tax policy – I’ll leave that one for you and will wish you luck in your upcoming political career. : )

          What I am pointing out is that the ends do not always justify the means. Playing fast and loose with pictures and supposed ‘quotes’ isn’t the honest way to present a argument. Some folks would have you believe that making a quote up and misappropriating a picture from another story to go along with it (arguably, a much more serious story than the gripe being presented here) is ‘OK’ as long as the messenger’s intent might be able to be corroborated in some other way, even if only partially. I would argue that such a thing sullies the author’s argument as the author has had to invent his prop to suit his argument. The end result is that the argument being made is distorted, or may even be false, or is attempting to initiate a particular conclusion within the recipient in order to push a particular agenda. A reader would do well to avoid being hoodwinked in this way, and to realize that he is being played.

          A truthful argument will not require such kinds of props. It will be able to stand on its own merits. Presented as such, it gives credence to its author as well.

          What it comes down to is, which Master do you want to serve?

    • Ed Ludeman

      Why would anyone believe that their taxes wouldn’t go up under Obama? :) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHlRY3kHhBk

      • mikey

        You will, of course, notice the upload date of that video – “Uploaded on Feb 11, 2010″.
        After that date, a payroll tax holiday was enacted, which was set for a year and has subsequently expired. You are paying the exact same rate on your payroll tax today as when those videos – featuring clips taken from the 2008 elections, even – were recorded. Even with the efforts of folks like this to make something appear to be something it is not (much like the image and text that this blog post leads off with), the fact remain that you are not paying a higher payroll tax today than when Obama was elected.

        • Ed Ludeman

          You will also notice that I said nothing about payroll taxes in my smart Alec response. Given the context of what we are commenting on you are excused for thinking that I may believe that this is the first time payroll taxes have been this high. That is not the case however. I apologize for not posting a few paragraphs about the actual situation and instead just trying for a one-liner. There have been tax increases and new taxes added on those who make less than $250,000 since he took office though, which means the campaign promise was broken and will continue to be I am sure. Not to mention the fact that by raising taxes on those making over $250,000 those who make less than that are also hurt.

          • mikey

            Kep – there are some instances that will affect a very small number of taxpayers (the ‘Tanning Salon Tax’, caps on pre-tax salary deferrals made to health-care spending accounts, etc). Forbes has a list at the link below. It’s inevitable that some type of legislation in 4 years may affect some type of tax rate; this has always happened in any period of ‘stable’ income tax rates. The scope of taxation that is usually referred to in the larger debate – the one that had America talking – centered around the Bush-era temporary cuts; ie, income tax rates. In fact, Obama gave ground to Republicans by raising that 250K limit quoted in the videos to a minimum of 400K for single earners, 450K for married folks.

            However, you may indeed be very much affected by the Tanning Salon Tax, depending upon how pale you might be, and your determination to change that at any cost. But, sunlight’s probably a healthier alternative, anyway. : )

            http://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleaebeling/2012/06/28/obamacares-7-tax-hikes-on-under-250000-a-year-earners/

  • Pingback: House of Eratosthenes

  • Pingback: Matters of Parallax, and Process Over Outcome | Rotten Chestnuts

  • Pingback: Matters of Parallax, and Process Over Outcome | Right Wing News


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X