If Newt Gingrich has made himself famous through oratorical bomb-throwing...and he has....then Mitt Romney has become famous for his willingness to take both sides of any issue.
Romney said this January 22nd...
What unfortunately happens is with all the multiplicity of federal programs, you have massive overhead, with government bureaucrats in Washington administering all these programs, very little of the money that’s actually needed by those that really need help, those that can’t care for themselves, actually reaches them.
The larger message Romney is seeking to convey is one of a bloated, inefficient, failed European-style socialistic government....all imposed on Americans in just the last 3 years by a president who really down deep....is not one of us. "Big government" is written all over Romney's comment here. And of course, only the "Democrat" Party is in favor of big government....because liberals, progressives, Democrats....want America to fail.
Problem is....what Romney said....I know this will come as a total surprise....is not factual.
As Paul Krugman pointed out in his column here....
"...between 90 percent and 99 percent of the dollars allocated to safety-net programs do, in fact, reach the beneficiaries."
Romney: "very little"..."reaches them".
Truth: 90% plus reaches them.
But that's only the half of it. A couple days ago, the GOP front runner.....as you've probably already heard....had this to say about the poor....
"I'm in this race because I care about Americans. I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I'll fix it," Romney told CNN Wednesday morning. " I'm not concerned about the very rich, they're doing just fine. I'm concerned about the very heart of the America, the 90 percent, 95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling."
On January 22nd, Romney tells us "very little" from "government bureaucrats" actually "reaches" the poor who need help. On February 1, Romney tells us he's not concerned about the poor because "we have a safety net there." I don't think both can be true at the same time. Either the safety net for the poor is broken almost beyond repair because "very Little" of designated government funding ever "reaches" those who are in need of it.....OR.....there's nothing to be overly concerned about when it comes to the poor because "we have a safety net there."
This is what I mean by Romney taking both sides of basically any issue. Yes, politicians promise stuff they know they won't be able to deliver on....but I don't ever recall a major candidate taking both sides of virtually every question he's asked.
Even though Romney added that if the safety net needed fixing....he'd fix it as president....in reality, as Krugman says...
Mr. Romney, however, wants to make the safety net weaker instead.
....the candidate has endorsed Representative Paul Ryan’s plan for drastic cuts in federal spending — with almost two-thirds of the proposed spending cuts coming at the expense of low-income Americans. To the extent that Mr. Romney has differentiated his position from the Ryan plan, it is in the direction of even harsher cuts for the poor; his Medicaid proposal appears to involve a 40 percent reduction in financing compared with current law.
So Mr. Romney’s position seems to be that we need not worry about the poor thanks to programs that he insists, falsely, don’t actually help the needy, and which he intends, in any case, to destroy.
And is it really true that Mitt Romney is "not concerned about the very rich"? Is that true? If Mitt is not really concerned about the very rich, like him, because they are doing just fine....then why does Romney's economic policy contain a provision to lower taxes on millionaires by another $145,000 per year?
If it's true that Romney is "not concerned" about the very rich because they're doing "just fine"....then why would the rich need an additional $145,000 per year? If I know someone who is very rich...and I do...how not concerned would I be about that very rich person if I wanted to give that very rich person another $145,000 every year?
The question becomes then.....can Americans believe anything that Mitt Romney says?
About This Blog