Romney: 'I'm not concerned about the very poor'

[CMF Newsman]

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Wednesday that he's "not concerned about the very poor" because they have an "ample safety net" and he's focused instead on relieving the suffering of middle-class people hit hard by the bad economy.

In comments likely to become fodder for his critics, Romney emphasized, "You can focus on the very poor, that's not my focus."

He brought up the subject of the poor in a CNN interview marking his big win in Florida's GOP primary Tuesday night, a major step toward becoming the party's challenger to President Barack Obama in the fall.

A multi-millionaire former venture capitalist, Romney has been criticized by Democrats and his Republican rivals alike for earlier remarks seen as insensitive, such as saying "I like being able to fire people" and declaring that he knew what it was like to worry about being "pink-slipped" out of a job.

seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2017387811_apusromney.html

[BlackFox]

Damnit! I find myself agreeing with him.

[Bryan Stone]

Romney has been saying lots of stuff that makes perfect sense but have some incredibly bad liners that can be spun and used out of context. This is another example. He makes perfect sense but the headline makes him sound like a jerk.

[LimitedRecourse]

Surely you aren't suggesting a media bias?

[Gary]

Surely you aren't suggesting a media bias?

This is not a case of media bias -- it's a case of bad politics on Romney's part. Saying, "I don't care about poor people" is just handing ammunition to Obama's campaign staff.

It's another in a long line of tone-deaf comments Romney has made, and he needs to get some better campaign advisers around him (and quick) before he buries himself even before he makes it to the general campaign.

Politics is all about perception, and the average voter isn't going to read the context of his comments, only "Hey, that Romney guy don't care about us poor people!"

[LimitedRecourse]

No. This is EXACTLY a case of media bias. The headline was used specifically to make Romney look like a rich, white dude and keep the majority of people from delving deeper into what Romney stands for. It is repeated headlines and out-of-context quotes that have made many decide to not vote for him because it reinforces their belief system.

[Half-Tard]

If you are in the business to sell news which headline would you run with? Don't give them the ammo they can't fire the shot.

[BlackFox]

Damned liberal mainstream, lamestream media and their direct quotes!

Romney keeps getting caught speaking his mind. I don't think people have a problem with him being super rich. I think they have a problem with the fact that he is exactly the stereotype of the "super rich, out of touch asshole".

[ssmynkint]

Reporting a foot in the mouth isn't bias.

[el Gusano]

I agree that it's not bias, but I sure do wish they'd spend as much time finding gaffes on both sides of the aisle. THAT's the bias.

[ssmynkint]

I recall Biden and Obama getting called-out for gaffes.

[BlackFox]

Feb 1, 2012 15:01:28 GMT -5 LimitedRecourse said:

No. This is EXACTLY a case of media bias..

“Facepalm,” Michelle Malkin wrote of the incident, which she said “could easily have been a Saturday Night Live parody”


Over at the National Review, Jonah Goldberg said the quote raised concerns that Romney is “simply not a good enough politician” to beat Obama.

“Romney’s ‘I’m not concerned with the very poor’ line may be the most idiotic thing a politician has ever said,” The Weekly Standard’s John McCormack tweeted.

RedState, whose bloggers have traditionally not been Romney fans, added their voices to the pile. According to co-founder Erick Erickson, Romney “played straight into the liberal caricature that Republicans don’t have hearts.”

"Everybody knows what he's trying to say but he didn't say it and he makes himself a target with this stuff. He comes across as the prototypical rich Republican. And it's gonna make it harder and harder and harder and harder to go after Obama because this turns around on him. You know, all these Wizards of Smart in the Republican establishment say, "We can't have Newt out there! Why, Newt's gonna be the topic. We need Obama to be the topic. We need Obama to be the guy campaign's about. If Newt's out there, it's only gonna be about Newt." Well, what evidence is there that it's not gonna be about Romney with these kinds of statements"? -Rush Limbaugh


Media bias indeed!

[BlackFox]

www.nationalreview.com/corner/289859/re-what-wrong-guy-mark-steyn

www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/mitt-romney-im-not-concerned-very-poor_620825.html

[Justin Thyme]

Actually, after hearing the entire conversation, I'm more inclined to vote for Mitt Romney. He seems to understand that we are taking care of the poor, our problem is that we aren't making it easy to climb into the middle class or stay there once we get there.

I'll let the politicians and talking heads worry about how this affects his electability. There opinion really isn't going to sway me though. I'll just vote for Mitt. Based on what he's actually saying, not what his enemies are going to say he's saying, he seems to understand exactly where the problem lies.

[BlackFox]

I'm sure he'll stand up for the poor and veto the bills that come his way dismantling the very programs for the poor that he mentioned as a reason to not be concerned about them.

Reporter:"Sir, you stated that welfare state programs currently in place are a reason not to be concerned about the plight of the poor. Are we to assume that you support these programs"?

Romney: "crickets"

[coffeeshooter]

I agree that the sound bites from his statement made him seem pompous and insensitive. I do tend to agree with the gist of his statement. I just find terms like ''the poor'' and ''the middle class'' to be vague representations of our citizenry.
I can't imagine that he or BHO actually comprehend the real life financial situations of the middle or low income person. One can only hope that their advisers can keep them on the right track.

[BlackFox]

As I stated in my OP, I agree with what he said. The difference is that I could say those words and feel good about it. Romney represents a party that wants to do away with those very programs.

He's painted himself into a corner on this one.

[osrb]

Romney is correct that the very poor have plenty of safety nets to keep them poor. The middle class (what ever that is) are the ones hurting. They make too much to get government assistance and not enough to keep what they have already have. It does seem at times that this administration is trying to make everybody poor in order to control them. It is working. You correct the GOP want to get rid of many of the programs because many of the them are bloated and redundant. Do not forget many of them were specifically designed to keep people poor and without hope.

[gridbug]

the sound bites from his statement made him seem pompous and insensitive

Only because he is pompous and insensitive. But being those does not make him inherently right or wrong.

[Bryan Stone]

Surely you aren't suggesting a media bias?

no. I'm not

This is not a case of media bias -- it's a case of bad politics on Romney's part. Saying, "I don't care about poor people" is just handing ammunition to Obama's campaign staff.

yep

No. This is EXACTLY a case of media bias.

no it's not

[LimitedRecourse]

Wow! I am blown away by Bryan Stone's insightful commentary.

[Warkitty]

It's at least as insightful as yours.

[Bryan Stone]

Wow! I am blown away by Bryan Stone's insightful commentary.

glad to contribute

[LimitedRecourse]

I'm sure you do all you can.