Obama and Romney have been fighting over who’s hardest on the poor

It was recently revealed by Mother Jones magazine that Mitt Romney hates poor people. Surprise!

At a private fundraiser Romney said that:

There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what…These are people who pay no income tax.

There you have it. Mitt Romney believes that 47% of America are entitled, food eating motherfuckers living it large on government cheese.

Some pundits have said this about seals the deal for Obama to coast back into the White House.  Which would be great for the 47% of people that Romney basically called dependent leeches, right?  A Romney presidency would be disastrous for people on government assistance (which was estimated by one Census study to be almost 20% of the US population in 2009).

The Obama campaign has been making it a point to attack Romney on welfare. But they’re not arguing that Romney is too hard on welfare recipients.  Instead, Obama’s campaign is arguing that Romney is too pro-welfare.  In an article from Jacobin magazine the author quotes one Obama campaign ad which,

Charged that Romney “petitioned the federal government for waivers that would have let people stay on welfare for an indefinite period, ending welfare reform as we know it, and even created a program that handed out free cars to welfare recipients.”  Only Obama can protect us from a Republican regime of hand-outs and Oprah-style free cars for the undeserving poor.

Check out this ad where Obama’s campaign attacks Mitt Romney for being “flexible on welfare,” and proudly defends Obama’s conservative position on welfare “reform.”

Obama has been attacking welfare recipients as far back as his first election campaign in 2008, when he said that he wants to

restore some balance to our economy so that middle class families who are working hard – they’re not on welfare, they’re going to their jobs every day, they’re doing the right things by their kids – they should be able to save, buy a home, go on a vacation once in a while.

Obama echoed these same racist, classist stereotypes of poor people as lazy criminals and unsuitable parents at a fundraiser in August, when his message to donors was that, “We need better role models…we have to provide stronger role models than the gang-banger on the corner.”

Rather than defend the idea that people should have access to welfare and should be entitled to food, housing and healthcare, the Obama campaign is competing with Romney over which candidate has the most backwards, conservative stance on welfare recipients.  Both can agree, welfare recipients are lazy and don’t want to work.  They’re bad parents and they are a drain on the system.  Romney’s just more of an asshole about it — sort of.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Obama and Romney have been fighting over who’s hardest on the poor

  1. Pingback: May I rant about how fucking racist Barack and Michelle Obama’s commencement speeches were? | a better world is probable

  2. Pingback: May I rant about how fucking racist Barack and Michelle Obama’s commencement speeches were? | Seattle Free Press

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s