Mitt’s ‘victims’

Thanks for visiting The Daily Sentinel

Subscribers and registered users, log in to continue reading for free*

Forgot your password?    

Register to read for free! Become a subscriber

* 7-day subscribers have unlimited access to online content.
Registered users may read 12 articles per month.


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

The New York Times article front-paged in Monday’s Sentinel (“Romney Internet video bluntly assesses Obama’s ’47 percent’ of voters”) and today’s timely editorial (“Mitt’s ‘victims’”) both bluntly reaffirm the Romney-Ryan campaign’s cynical dishonesty.

Romney’s strongest appeal is to “white, non-college-educated male” voters, but he impliedly claims that more-educated, female, and minority voters support President Obama only because they are “freeloaders” who would vote for him “no matter what” – not because they recognize that Romney is an arrogant, unqualified wannabe who is relying on outright falsehoods and coded racism to promote an unpatriotic and immoral agenda that would enable the “1%” to destroy the American Dream of the “middle class”.

As the Sentinel noted, while almost 47% of American households (perhaps including Romney’s) pay no federal income taxes, most of them do pay payroll taxes.  Of the 18.1% of households who pay neither, “more than half were elderly” or “had incomes under $20,000” – including many Republicans.  Moreover, various tax credits which eliminate federal income taxes for many are the direct result of Republican tax policies.

Moreover, while Romney defines the “middle class” as including those earning up to $250,000 annually, President Obama has promised not to raise taxes on those earning less than that amount – necessarily including the “middle class”.

While both assert they will not increase taxes on the “middle class”, Romney’s tax plan actually raises taxes on incomes between $100,000 and $250,000 – and thus would also raise taxes on thousands of successful “job-creating” small businesses which Obama would not.  Rather, President Obama retains the “Bush Tax Cuts” for all income below $250,000 and returns to Clinton-era marginal tax rates on income above that amount.

As the Sentinel’s editorial clearly intimates, Romney simply cannot be trusted by the “thoughtful . . . 5-10% in the center” who still remain noncommittal. 

                Bill Hugenberg

It has now come out that there were several minutes edited out of that tape… BIG SURPRISE,huh?  Yet again another lie perpetrated by a sneaky liberal placing an unauthorized, hidden tape in a private meeting. Can you imagine the uproar if a conservative had done that.  Also, the DS is wrong and Romney was right about the 47%. Come on… 46-47? good grief.  OH and now the truth is coming out about the attacks on our embassy!  So you all decide who is the ‘biggest liar’ in this race for the White House.  How anyone can even begin to believe what comes out of the mouths of this administration.. any of them.. is beyond my understanding!! Oh and Hugenberg…JUST SHUT UP FOR AWHILE - WILL YOU… for me and many others I bet, when I see your name I just MOVE ON!!

Dear Joyce:

1.  I’ve heard that there were “two minutes” missing from the tape—when whoever was doing it inadvertently turned off the camera.  Even if there were “several minutes edited out of the tape”—what was edited out and what difference did that make to the rest of the tape?  BIG SURPRISE, Huh?

2.  I have not heard about “a sneaky liberal placing an unauthorized, hidden tape in a private meeting”.  What I did hear was that the host of the fundraiser apologized to Romney because he had wanted to give the tape as a momento to those who had paid $50,000 to attend.  Given the number of people in attendance, there was no serious “expectation of privacy”.

3.  When conservates do that, they also doctor the tape (ala ACORN).

4.  On what basis was the DS wrong?  On what basis was Romney right?  His words speak for themselves as to the 47%.  GOOD GRIEF!!

5.  As expected, it will take time for the whole truth to come out about the embassy attacks.  While I have heard right wing talk radio accuse the administration of “lying” about it, they never make it clear exactly what the lie was (demonstration, preplanned attack, or both).  Romney was the first to conflate Cairo and Benghazi, and the Ambassador himself minimized security concerns.

6.  There is clearly no question as to who has been the “biggest liar” in the race for the White House.  Paul Ryan’s was the “Most Dishonest Convention Speech Ever”, according to fact-checkers at the Nation of Change, and Romney’s distortion of President Obama’s tax proposals “was the single biggest convention lie by a Republican niominee for president in history”.

7.  Everyone who objectively fact-checks what “comes out of the mouths of this administration”—as opposed to what Romney-Ryan say—confirms that there is a credible basis for usual belief and occasional doubt (leading to follow-up questions).

8.  Thus, moving on, it seems that Joyce Dry is really “Just all wet”!

its crude and rude to make fun of someones name… a new low for you.

As to the rest of your points….. blah blah blah…..

No, Judy, not a “new low”—just an appropriate pun!!

drinking too much of that koolade I think….. who’s Judy?

As usual, no facts to back up your blah, blah, blah!!

Sorry, Joyce, that was unforgiveable.  I prefer strawberry!

Search More Jobs

734 S. Seventh St.
Grand Junction, CO 81501
Subscribe to print edition
Sign in to your account

© 2014 Grand Junction Media, Inc.
By using this site you agree to the Visitor Agreement and the Privacy Policy