Damning Video Contrasts Romney’s Comments to Funders vs Pastors

If a picture is worth a thousand words, this video is worth even more.  The video by Message Matters and American Values Network contrasts Romney’s statement to faith leaders about the poor and importance of maintaining a government safetynet vs his now infamous statements to rich donors about how he really feels.   Nothing I can say is more damning than Romney’s own words, so I’ll let Romney speak for himself (and disagree with himself).  Please share.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zKoUzvpPPA&feature=youtu.be

Twitter: @SappEric

 

 

 

Romney to Faith Leaders vs Romney to Rich Donors

  • Frank

    This video only proves that you misrepresented what he said or you were so blinded by bias thta you didn’t understand what he meant with his poor choice of words. Either way you are the one who should be embarrassed.

  • Eric Sapp

    Frank, can you explain what you meant? The video uses his own words, so it’s not a matter of my misrepresenting what he said. And what exactly did he mean when he said the 47% of people not paying federal income tax will never be able to be convinced to take personal responsibility for their lives? Yes, it was a very poor choice of words b/c they only mean one thing.

    • Frank

      What he said was factually true. 47% do not pay fed taxes and they will probably not vote for Romney. He was talking votes and you know that. So stop being dishonest. It’s shameful from someoen who would call themselves a Christian. We expect it from the media and those stuck in partisanship but Christians?

      Romney is still the only clear choice. Another Obama term will be a disaster for our country.

      • Eric Sapp

        First of all, they DO pay federal taxes. In fact, most pay a higher % of federal taxes than Romney, since they pay payroll at 15% and he only paid 13% taxes in the one years he’s released. But going with the no income tax argument, it’s true. But the issue isn’t that he said 47% of people don’t pay income tax (most of whom are seniors, students, vets, etc). The issue is that he said those people don’t take personal responsibility for their lives and won’t ever. He said it, and it is exactly what he meant. The dishonesty is that he’d say such horrible things about those people and the poor to rich donors and say govt shouldn’t help them and then turn around and tell pastors how important these govt programs are and how we have to keep them for future generations. Frank, you’ve got no legs to stand on here…and it’s disappointing to hear you argue that someone is unChristian b/c they raising concerns with a politician who says retirees, students, and working parents will never “take personal responsibility for their lives.”

        • Frank

          Sad that you fail to realize that you have no legs to stand on here except mischaracterizations and hyperbole.

          You should be embarrassed but you are too blind to see it.

          Meanwhile Romney is still the best choice forward.

          • Eric Sapp

            Frank, you aren’t answering any of the points. What did Romney mean when he said that 47% of Americans would never be convinced to take personal responsibility for their lives? Answer that point and we can have a productive conversation.

          • Frank

            As I said he had a poor choice of words. He meant that the people who have become addicted and dependent on government assistance would never vote someone in who wanted to change that.

  • http://christianindependent.wordpress.com Thomas

    This is what I say to that reply. Ok, poor choice of words. Fine. Then come out and say specifically what you meant and make it unambiguously clear that you DO NOT actually believe what it clearly seems you meant to say about the 47%. Either way, it’s too late anyway. It looks like that’s what he actually meant and that is reinforced by the fact that he was being totally honest in a setting where he didn’t think he had to “say the right thing politically.” It was a rare moment for complete honesty and we got it. And, it should be added, that not one single solitary soul in that entire meeting stood up and asked him to clarify what he said. They heard what we heard and they understood exactly the same way we do – because THAT is what Romney actually meant!

  • Ted Seeber

    Frank, there is no way the Republicans will end abortion. Given their past track record, even for those Republicans that are clearly pro-life, it’s down around 10-15 on the priority list.

    Where for Obama, the fight over Ryan’s budget made it clear that for the Democrats, they will sacrifice EVERYTHING to a woman’s right to murder. It is #1 on their priority list. Given the choice between WIC and Planned Parenthood, Planned Parenthood will be funded. Given the choice between SNAP and Planned Parenthood, Planned Parenthood will be funded. Given the choice between TANF and Planned Parenthood, Planned Parenthood will be funded. Given the choice between the Veterans Administration and Planned Parenthood, Planned Parenthood will be funded.

    Neither side cares about the poor at all.

    • Frank

      Ted on the state level only republicans are making strides in making abortion harder. GOP all the way!

  • Pingback: Does God Want Obama to Win?

  • Pingback: Romney Takes Stand on Abortion (and another, and another, and…)